Residents' Services SC

Minutes RESIDENTS' SERVICES SELECT COMMITTEE 19 February 2025 Meeting held at Committee Room 5 - Civic Centre Committee Members Present: Councillors Wayne Bridges (Chair), Peter Smallwood (Vice -Chair), Darran Davies, Ekta Gohil, Scott Farley (Opposition Lead), Janet Gardner and Kamal Preet Kaur Others Present: Freddie Mohammed, Parking Representations and Appeals Manager Liz Penny, Democratic Services Officer Stephanie Waterford, Head of Public Protection and Enforcement Richard Webb, Director Community Safety & Enforcement 50. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (Agenda Item 1) There were no apologies for absence. 51. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST IN MATTERS COMING BEFORE THIS MEETING (Agenda Item 2) There were no declarations of interest. 52. TO RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING (Agenda Item 3) RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting dated 14 January 2025 be agreed as an accurate record. 53. TO CONFIRM THAT THE ITEMS OF BUSINESS MARKED AS PART I WILL BE CONSIDERED IN PUBLIC AND THOSE MARKED PART II WILL BE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE (Agenda Item 4) It was confirmed that all items of business were marked as Part 1 and would be considered in public. 54. FUN FAIRS - REGULATIONS AND HIRING ARRANGEMENTS (Agenda Item 5) Stephanie Waterford, Head of Public Protection and Enforcement was in attendance to answer Members’ questions in relation to the report as set out in the agenda pack. Members asked about the amount of charges given to companies that erec ted funfairs in parks and how the revenue compared to that of other boroughs. In response, it was confirmed that the charges were managed by the Green Spaces team. Members heard that Hi llingdon had a disproportionate amount of green space compared to other London areas. It was agreed that this question would be taken back to the Green Spaces team for clarification. Councillors sought further clarification as to how noise from funfairs w as managed, noting that complaints from residents were sometimes receiv ed. It was explained that officers responded to service requests when noise was considered unbearable or unreasonable. It was confirmed that residents could log a service request; offic ers would then assess the situation and decide on the appropriate course of action. An out of hours service was also available. The Committee Members enquired whether there were any terms and conditions in place in respect of noise and lighting when comp anies made a booking. It was confirmed that there were hiring lease arr angement terms and conditions attached to any hire agreement by Green Spaces. It was an offence to create a nuisance hence such matters could be reported to the Environmental Protection service, which would respond accordingly. It was noted that the service was reactive rather than proactive. Site visits to ensure compliance were not routinely undertaken; the service was responsive and officers responded to any complaints raised. Councillors asked if the same contractors returned to the same sites each ye ar or if there were changes in contractors. It was confirmed that typically the same funfair operators returned to the same sites, but other operators could come in at any point. Members raised concerns regarding large advertising boards noting that these were sometimes left up for a considerable amount of time before and after funfairs. In response, officers explained that travelling fairs were required to remove signage within 14 days of an event finishing. If they failed to do so, the Council could issu e a fixed penalty notice (FPN) to the operator. In the case of events on private land, the situation was more complex. Where repeated noise complaints had been received in respect of a specific contractor, Members recommended the inclusion of a specific clause in relation to this in the hire agreement. It was agreed that officers would follow this up with the Green Spaces team. The Committee asked about the fines in place for leaving advertising boards up and sought reassurance as to whether these were r obust enough. It was explained that the fines were moderate, between £50 and £100, and that multiple fines could be issued depending on the amount and location of the boards. Members he ard that these were statutory fines which could not be amended – prosecution was an option in extreme cases. It was noted that the service was reactive and relied on people reporting any concerns. In view of the above, the Committee suggested the introdu ction of a bond concept for funfair companies to ensure they removed th eir posters and did not damage Council land. It was agreed that this was a good idea which would be fed back to Green Spaces. With regard to food hygiene, it was confirmed that mobile caterers were obliged to be registered with the home authority where their business was based. At the request of Members, it was agreed that Green Spaces would be requested to clarify how much of the £25k revenue was reinvested in the repair of the Counc il’s green spaces further to an event. Noting that funfairs were largel y unregulated, Members recommended the inclusion of additional measures in local policy. The Head of Public Protection and Enforcement agreed to explore this further outside of the meeting. Members asked about the responsibility for health and safety enforcement at funfairs. It was explained that the Health and Safety Executive enforced funfairs rather than the local authority and would investigate any injuries or incidents – these were not routinely reported to the local authority. Councillors recommended that, when signing up, funfair operators be asked to confirm that no health and safety incidents had occurred at previous events. The officer agreed to feed back this suggestion fo r inclusion in future policies. Members heard that, when considering applications, Green Spaces would take into account any complaints previously received and this would feed into their decision. It was noted that complaints regarding funfairs were rarely received. However, it was recognised that policy could be more robust a nd the importance of reporting issues to build a data picture for shaping future work was emphasised. Members enquired how the Council worked proactively with funfair operators to ensu re they adhered to regulations and behaved reasonably. Officers affirmed that there was a lot of advice, guidance, and education available for operators, including information on the HSE website. In response to questions about food safety at funfairs, it was explained that food inspectors did not proactively inspect food es tablishments at events unless it was a licensed event like a Christmas market. However, they would respond to claims or reports of unsafe or unhygienic practices and food poisoning. It was noted that food inspectors had a planned programme for inspecting food businesses in the Borough and would react to any reported issues. Should someone fall ill after eating food at a funfair that had already packed up and left, the matter would be referred to the home authority of the funfair operator for follow- up. The home authority might decide to bring the inspection forward or carry out another investigation. It was acknowledged that proving instances of food poisoning could be difficult without hard samples of the food. Members sought clarification regarding the permitted operating hours for circuses and funfairs and whether certain aspects of these events were time limited. It was explained that each site was conditioned based on its local circ umstances, and Green Spaces would decide the most appropriate start and finish times. There were no regulations stipulating specific timings, but the hire agreement could include such stipulations if deemed appropriate. Councillors expressed concern about the reactive behaviour of the Council and suggested more proactive work with the hiring part. The Head of Public Protection and Enforcement agreed to take the feedback back to the relevant department. RESOLVED: That the Select Committee: 1. Noted the infor mation included in the report regarding the regulatory requirements of fun fairs; and 2. Noted the current Council hiring processes related to fun fair events on Council land. 55. PARKING SERVICES & CONTRACT MONITORING (Agenda Item 6) Richard Webb, Director of Community Safety and Enforcement, and Freddie Mohammed, Parking Representations and Appeals Manager, were in attendance to answer Members’ questions in relation to the report in the agenda pack. It was noted that it would be helpfu l if APCOA could attend a future meeting of the Select Committee to answer Members’ questions. Councillors asked about the contract key performance indicators in Appendix 2, questioning if everything was as perfect as it seemed. It was explained that the report provided a snapshot of the last month and that there had been months with amber and red indicators, which were addressed in contract meetings. Members suggested an annual review to identify patterns and raised a ward -related issue about enforceme nt consistency at Ruislip Lido during the summer months. Officers ackno wledged the challenges around parking in and around the Lido and explained the deployment of tow trucks and CEOs during the summer, mentioning the limitations due to the lack of a pound and the need to move obstructive cars to another location. In response to further questions from the Committee, it was explained that CEOs worked autonomously, and it was not possible for officers to monitor them at all times due to a lack of resources. However, body worn cameras could be tracked, inactivity was monitored a nd contractor supervisors made their own checks – the data was fed back to LBH officers and footage could be reviewed when necessary. Councillors enquired about the contract with APCO A and whether competitors were regularly considered. Officers stated that the existing contract had begun in April 2022 and would run until 2027. It was explained that the contract had likely been awarded based on value for money and that other contractors might not engage with them until the end of the current contract. Offi cers also highlighted the factors affecting PCN numbers, such as policy decisions and the deployment of CEOs in different areas. Members sought further clarification regarding the resp onsibility for issuing FPNS for idling cars and the shift to cashless parking. It was explained that idling was a criminal offence under the public spaces protection order, requiring different systems and training for officers hence it would be difficult t o train CEOs to take on responsibility for both parking and idling offe nces. It was confirmed that cashless parking systems allowed for payment by phone and card, and problematic locations would be considered for appropriate steps. Councillors pointed out that a year-on-year comparison of PCN data would be helpful. In response to further queries raised by the Committee, it was confirmed that adequate signage was a legal obligation under the Traffic Signs Directive. The onus was on drivers to familiarise themselves with the signs and the restrictions in place. With regard to cashless payments, it was recognised that scams using fake QR codes etc were a national problem. Officers regularly discussed this matter with the Police and did everything possible to raise public awareness. It was confirmed that CEOs had been instructed to remove fake QR codes or cover them when possible. Members heard that data relating to scams was not recorded centrally. However, officers would continue to monitor this and target a reas where there had been a spike in criminal activity. In response t o questions from Members regarding blue badge fraud, it was confirmed that there was no requirement for residents to display their photograph. The Committee was advised that CEOs could ask to inspect badges and that initiatives with the Counter Fraud Team had been undertaken. At the request of Members, it was agreed that officers would clarify the meaning of the term ‘statutory’ parking dispensations as referenced on page 41 of the report. Further to Councillors’ queries, it was agreed that officers wou ld clarify whether income generated had matched expectations and the % usage of the Hillingdon First Card in the Borough. It was agreed that this information would be sourced after the meeting and fed back to the Committee. In response to concerns raised by Members regarding the safety of CEOs and the reliance on body -worn cameras, the Committee heard that CEOs were trained in conflict management and there were protocols in place for co de yellow and code red situations. Code reds were discussed at monthly meetings and closely monitored. It was also mentioned that CEOs had mobile phones as back up should their devices fail and that incidents were reported to the police to build a pattern or trend. It was reported that CEOs were encouraged to report any incidents so these could be logged and addressed. CEOs did not routinely work after 19:00 hours; thereafter any out of hours parking -related problems would need to be reported to the Polic e. Members were informed that CEOs’ working hours could be extended from time to time if needed but a permanent change in hours would require an amendment to the current contract. Further to the Committee’s questions regarding banding, it was confirmed th at two things had happened in parallel; one was Hillingdon’s application to move from Band B to Band A. The second was the London Council's application to increase the band fine rates across London. Members heard that the increase in fine levels had been a greed, and this had impacted on LBH’s application to go from Band B to Band A. It was confirmed that the Pan London change would now increase the fine levels even higher than it would have done. This had undermined Hillingdon’s consultation somewhat as the Council had consulted publicly about a change based on moving from Band B to Band A at a certain level, and now those levels had completely changed. The Cabinet Member would therefore need to decide whether to continue to push for Band A, remain on Band B or revisit the matter at a later stage. Officers were requested to p rovide information on the incidence of code reds in car parks. It was agreed that this would be followed up after the meeting. In response to further questions from Councillors, it wa s confirmed that approximately 40% of Hillingdon’s residents now used the pay by phone parking service. It was noted that fines could only be cancelled where there was evidence of error. The Traffic Management Act was inflexible – once a parking ticket had been issued, the onus was on the recipient to prove that it had been issued in error. Noting that similar pay -by-phone locations sometimes had different parking codes and different parking rates which was somewhat confusing, Members enquired whether the current system could be simplified . It was agreed that officers would review this further outside of the meeting to see if changes could be made to simplify the system. Councillors asked about the effectiveness of the ANPR van and its potential for issui ng tickets. The officer explained that they had trialled an ANPR van an d were evaluating its cost-effectiveness. They mentioned that the van could cover more ground efficiently, but for most offences, a CEO still had to issue the ticket. Members enquired about the percentage of PCNs that went to debt collection. Officers stated that they had access to this data and could provide it, explaining that the decision to pay or contest a PCN varied among individuals. In response to questions about the split of revenue between APCOA and the Council, it was explained that APCOA was p aid a fee to deploy officers, and the revenue from fines went to the Council to offset the costs. It was emphasised that the contract was not based on the number of PCNs issued but on compliance. Finally, it was noted that, prior to the meeting, the Chair had requested a breakdown of the £4.5 million mentioned in the report regarding spend on traffic wardens. It had been agreed that officers would provide this information outside of the meeting. RESOLVED: That the Select Committee noted the content of th e report and the Council’s obligations under the governing legislation. 56. FORWARD PLAN (Agenda Item 7) RESOLVED: That the Forward Plan be noted. 57. WORK PROGRAMME (Agenda Item 8) At the request of Members, it was agreed that an item on allotments would be added to the Committee’s Work Programme. Members enquired whether the information item regarding Heathrow could be brought forward on the Work Programme. RESOLVED: That the Work Programme be noted. The meeting, which commenced at 7.00 pm, closed at 9.00 pm. These are the minutes of the above meeting. For more information on any of the resolutions please contact Liz Penny, Democratic Services Officer on epenny@hillingdon.gov.uk. Circulation of these minutes is to Councillo rs, officers, the press and members of the public.

Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public RESIDENTS’ SERVICES SELECT COMMITTEE – SAFER HILLINGDON PARTNERSHIP REPORT Committee name Residents’ Services Select Committee Officer reporting Richard Webb, Director of Community Safety and Enforcement Papers with report Appendix 1 - Reported Crime Overview Appendix 2 - MPS Report Ward All HEADLINES The Residents’ Services Select Committee acts as a Crime and Disorder Committee as defined in the Crime and Disorder (Overview and Scrutiny) Regulations 2009 and carries out the bi -annual scrutiny of decisions made, or other action taken, in connection with the discharge by the responsible authorities of their crime and disorder functions. As part of its statut ory responsibility to undertake crime and disorder scrutiny, this report provides the Residents’ Services Select Committee with a report from the Metropolitan Police Service and an update on the work of the Safer Hillingdon Partnership, as the statutory community safety partnership for the Borough. RECOMMENDATION That the Residents’ Services Select Committee notes the contents of the reports and asks questions in order to clarify matters of concern or interest in the Borough. Witnesses Chief Inspector Ben Wright, MPS, will be attending the meeting to answer questions relating to crime in the Borough and the Policing response to that crime. Richard Webb, Director of Community Safety and Enforcement for Hillingdon Council will attend the meeting to answer questions relating to the Safer Hillingdon Partnership and the work of the Council to prevent and reduce crime. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Mayor’s Police and Crime Plan and Grant Funding In December 2024 the London Mayor published a draft Police and Crime Plan for 2025-2029. This Police and Crime Plan sets out the Mayor’s proposed high-level priorities for policing, crime and community safety in London for the period 2025 to 2029. The Mayor’s agenda is stated to be “to make London a safer city for all, by being tough on crime and tough on the complex causes of crime.” The Plan i s structured around three key objectives that the Mayor wants the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) , the M etropolitan Police Service (MPS) and all partners to work Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public together to achieve. Reducing Violence and Criminal Exploitation The Mayor will: • Take a public health approach to tackling the causes of violence and lead a city -wide effort to prevent people from being drawn into violent crime. • Support and oversee robust enforcement and partnership activities to reduce violent crime and protect people from exploitation. • Work with criminal justice agencies and other organisations to reduce reoffending by violent offenders. • Take a public health approach to reducing Violence Against Women and Girls. • Stand with communities against hatred and extremism, and work with agencies to strengthen London’s counter-terrorism efforts. Increasing Trust and Confidence in the MPS The Mayor will: • Build trust through greater transparency and accountability. • Support the MPS and build partnerships to make neighbourhoods safer. Improving the Criminal Justice System and Supporting Victims The Mayor will: • Support and oversee the MPS to deliver a better service for victims of crime. • Support improvement in the criminal justice system in London. • Work with criminal justice partners to reduce reoffending. • Commission high-quality support services for victims. • Support the work of London’s Independent Victims’ Commissioner A Council response was provided to this draft Police and Crime Plan, and officers are now waiting for the final plan to be published. This plan, and its priorities and objectives, will need to be considered by the Safer Hillingdon Partnership and reflected in the partnership’s work programme. The Council receives a Local Crime P revention Fund grant from MOPAC for work to tackle and reduce priority crimes in Hillingdon. The current grant ends in March 2025. MOPAC have confirmed that the grant funding will continue at current levels for the next 4 years. A bid for this funding has been submitted by the Council and officers are waiting for confirmation that this bid has been accepted. The work to be funded by the grant needs to support the local delivery of the Mayor’s Police and Crime Plan priorities and it has been proposed that the grant for Hillingdon will contribute towards the local costs of:  The Council’s domestic abuse work, including victim support services.  Reduction of the risk of criminal exploitation, particularly for young people.  The cost of supporting the Community Risk Multi -Agency Risk Assessment Conference process. Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Safer Hillingdon Partnership Developments Membership of the Safer Hillingdon Partnership has been extended and now includes representatives of the Hillingdon Hospital and Harmondsworth Immigration Removal Centre. The Safer Hillingdon Partnership is currently finalising a new Community Safety S trategy for the Borough. The strategy will identify the priorities for the partnership and the organisational arrangements in place to deliver actions against those priorities and monitor progress of partnership plans. To support the identification of the priorities, the annual strategic assessment is being finalised which profiles crime in the Borough and strategic issues likely to affect crime and community safety partnerships. For the first time in a number of years, to support the identification of priorities for the partnership a c rime and disorder survey has been undertaken. This survey seeks respondents’ views on the crime, disorder, and anti -social behaviour issues that they think the partnership prioritise addressing and their experiences on reporting crimes if they have been a victim of crime . There has been a good response to the survey to date with nearly 500 responses. The survey closes on 30th March. Appendix 1 of this report contains some crime data from the draft Community Safety Strategic Assessment as background information for the Committee. At the September 2024 meeting of the Resident ’s Services Select Committee the Committee were informed that a new community safety d ashboard was in development for the Safer Hillingdon Partnership which would enable the partnership to view crime trends at each meeting. This dashboard is now available and was utilised at the December 2024 partnership meeting as supporting data for discussions on crime trends. Cuckooing In August 2024 the partnership agreed a new c uckooing protocol and a webinar to promote the protocol was delivered in November. This work has progressed as part of the Anti-Social Behaviour priority of the Safer Hillingdon Partnership. ‘Cuckooing’ is the name applied when the home of a vulnerable person is taken over to be used for criminal purposes, normally without the consent of the occupier. Following the adopting of the protocol, a webinar for internal and exte rnal stakeholders —including Community and Voluntary Organizations, NHS staff, social workers and other front-line practitioners—was conducted on 21st November 2024, in conjunction with Adult Safeguarding Week and with support from the Safeguarding Partnership Team. This new protocol has led to an increased awareness of how vulnerable people may be exploited in their homes, which is turn has led to an increase in cuckooing referrals to the Community Multi- Agency Risk Assessment Conference process (C MARAC). In 2024, 8 cases of cuckooing were referred to the CMARAC and 8 have been referred in January and February 2025 alone . At CMARAC meetings cases are discussed with all relevant partners and actions agreed to help reduce the risks to the people being exploited and the impacts of the criminal behaviour on the local community. Closure Orders Further partnership work in relation to the Safer Hillingdon Partnership priority to reduce anti -social behaviour has seen a significant increase in the use of Closure Orders in the Borough. A Closure Order under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 can be granted by a Court on Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public application by the police or local authority when there are reasonable grounds to believe that the premises concerned are being used for anti -social behaviour or other illegal activities. The order prohibits anyone from entering the premises other than those identified in the order, typically the owner, legal occupier, emergency services and other named parties. They are effective in deterring anti-social or criminal behaviour since they make it an arrestable offence for unauthorised persons to enter the premises. The Council, with support from the Police, have successfully applied for and been granted closure orders for a number of Council premises which have suf fered form long-standing problems of anti- social behaviour in the communal areas of the buildings or associated with visitors to some properties in the building. Orders were secured for Harding House, Sutcliffe House , Skeffington Court, Fairlie House and The Gouldings. Two further closure orders were obtained on two properties that were being used as brothels. Police Neighbourhood Teams have regularly visited the premises concerned to monitor compliance with the orders and arrests have been made where unau thorised persons were found in those premises. Residents of the buildings concerned have reported a significant reduction in ASB at the buildings concerned and welcomed the action by the Council and Police. Precision Crime Fighting Group The Police and Council have recently introduced a new partnership meeting to support joint working on emerging and priority crime and disorder issues in the Borough. Monthly joint meetings enable Police and Council teams to review overall crime data for th e Borough and information relating to specific priorities. This meeting is intended to ensure there is a shared understanding of the community safety related threat, risk and harm in Hillingdon . A focus on subjects and locations of concern enables joint ta sking of resources such as CCTV and allows for agreement on how the different options available to the Police and Council can be best utilised to reduce community risks. Financial Implications None at this stage. Legal Implications None at this stage. Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Appendix 1 – Reported Crime Overview Breakdown of reported offences by crime type for 2024 for Hillingdon(source MPS) Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Change in Recorded Offences by Type between 2023 and 2024 Rate of Offences by Type Per 1000 Population

Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 2 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 1. Introduction Purpose of the report: This report is presented to the Residents’ Services Select Committee to provide an overview of community safety in the London Borough of Hillingdon. It reviews local policing structures, performance on key crime and safety issues, recent Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) reforms, and strategic challenges. The purpose is to inform Committee members and stakeholders of current progress and areas for improvement, and to support effective scrutiny of community safety efforts. Role of the MPS in community safety: The Metropolitan Police Service is the primary agency responsible for preventing and responding to crime and disorder in Hillingdon. The local police work in partnership with the Council and other agencies to address issues ranging from serious crime to anti-social behaviour. Through proactive patrol, crime investigation, and problem-solving initiatives, the MPS plays a central role in keeping communities safe and supporting victims of crime. It also contributes to multi-agency efforts such as the Safer Hillingdon Partnership to tackle underlying causes of crime (e.g. substance misuse, youth violence). Ultimately, the MPS’s mandate is not only to enforce the law but to build public trust and confidence in safety across the borough. Context of scrutiny and accountability: The Select Committee’s oversight forms part of the statutory framework for holding the police and partners to account for local community safety. In light of recent high-profile failures and the findings of the 2023 Casey Review into the Met, there is heightened public and political focus on policing standards and accountability. Hillingdon’s residents expect transparency, ethical conduct, and results from their police. This report is therefore set against a backdrop of both longstanding expectations (to reduce crime and anti-social behaviour) and renewed scrutiny of how policing is delivered. The Committee’s role is to examine performance, challenge shortcomings, and support continuous improvement in the joint effort to keep Hillingdon safe. 2. Overview of Policing in Hillingdon BCU structure and key teams: Policing in Hillingdon is managed as part of the West Area Basic Command Unit (BCU) of the Metropolitan Police, which also covers the neighbouring boroughs of Ealing and Hounslow. The West Area BCU is segmented into several key operational strands: Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 3 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025  Emergency Response Teams: Uniformed response officers handle 999 calls and immediate incidents across Hillingdon 24/7. They provide the first line of policing, rushing to emergencies, deterring crime through patrols, and conducting initial investigations. Response teams aim to quickly hand over longer-term inquiries to investigative units so they can return to visible patrol duties. Hillingdon’s response officers are based out of a local patrol hub in Uxbridge to cover the borough.  Neighbourhood Policing: These teams focus on local, ward-level policing and community engagement. Every ward in Hillingdon has a Dedicated Ward Officer (DWO) team – typically at least two police constables – plus a Police Community Support Officer (PCSO), who are “ring-fenced” to their communities and not abstracted to other duties. Neighbourhood officers work on crime prevention, problem-solving and public reassurance. This includes Safer Neighbourhood Teams tackling issues like anti-social behaviour, running school visits and youth engagement programs, liaising with faith and community groups, licensing enforcement, and addressing local priorities set by residents. A centrally-coordinated Partnership and Prevention Hub supports these officers with specialist expertise (for example in youth engagement, ASB, or crime prevention) and coordinates daily information-sharing with council teams.  Local Investigations (CID): Detective teams in the BCU carry out investigations into more serious or complex crimes that require longer-term inquiry (such as burglaries, serious assaults, fraud, etc.). They also manage offender targeting (e.g. prolific burglars or gang members) and coordinate the BCU’s response to violent crime problems. These investigators work to gather evidence, arrest suspects, and build cases, often in coordination with specialist Met units for complex or high-harm crimes.  Safeguarding / Public Protection: Specialist officers in this strand focus on protecting vulnerable people and high-risk cases. They handle crimes like child abuse, domestic abuse, sexual offences, and hate crimes, as well as managing high-risk missing persons cases. The Public Protection teams work closely with Hillingdon Council (e.g. social services, housing) and other partners to safeguard victims and coordinate support services. Their goal is to provide a victim-cantered approach and prevent further harm, for instance through multi-agency risk assessment conferences for domestic abuse victims.  BCU Headquarters and Support: An HQ function manages critical support services and coordination across West Area. This includes a local control room (for command and control of incidents across Hillingdon, Ealing, and Hounslow), as well as units for training, professional standards, custody, criminal justice (processing cases to court), and administrative support. These enable frontline officers to function effectively and ensure the BCU runs smoothly. Together, these teams provide a comprehensive policing presence in Hillingdon. The BCU is led by a senior officer (Chief Superintendent / BCU Commander) who oversees local strategy and performance. Each strand is headed by a Superintendent or Chief Inspector, and resources are flexibly allocated based on demand and priorities across the three boroughs. Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 4 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 Partnership approach with council and third-sector: Hillingdon’s approach to community safety is firmly rooted in partnership working. The Safer Hillingdon Partnership (SHP) is the borough’s statutory community safety partnership, bringing together the Council, MPS, London Fire Brigade, health services, probation, and other agencies at an executive level. Through the SHP, joint strategies are developed to: reduce crime and anti-social behaviour, reduce re- offending, tackle substance misuse, and prevent serious violence. For example, the partnership has identified key priorities for 2024 including: (1) Preventing violence against women and girls, (2) Combatting drug-related harm, (3) Reducing anti-social behaviour, and (4) Tackling other violent crime such as knife crime. The police contribute to each of these priorities alongside council teams (like Community Safety, Licensing, and Youth Services) and community organisations. Practical collaboration happens through regular multi-agency meetings and initiatives. Hillingdon Police and Council attend monthly tasking and thematic meetings to coordinate actions on hotspots, vulnerable persons and offenders. Joint operations are common – for instance, police and council ASB officers conduct evenings of action against nuisance behaviour, or joint licensing reviews of problem premises. The third sector and voluntary groups are also key partners: charities supporting domestic abuse victims, neighbourhood watch schemes, and youth diversion programs all work with the police to enhance safety outcomes. This partnership ethos recognises that policing alone cannot solve complex social problems, and that a joined-up approach is more effective in preventing crime. Resource allocation and staffing: Hillingdon’s policing resources are drawn from the wider West Area BCU pool of officers. The BCU has circa 1,800 officers spread across 5 departments and 3 boroughs (the exact number fluctuates), with a share of those dedicated to Hillingdon’s needs. Each ward in the borough currently benefits from dedicated neighbourhood officers (at least 2 DWOs and 1 PCSO per ward as a baseline), which boosts visible policing at the community level. Emergency response teams are positioned to ensure fast coverage across Hillingdon, the borough accounts for about 30% of West BCU’s calls for service. Despite these efforts, resource management remains a careful balancing act. The West BCU must distribute officers between three boroughs based on demand; at times Hillingdon resources are stretched by major incidents or aid to central London events. Maintaining sufficient staffing in key teams (e.g. detectives in Local Investigations and Public Protection) and keeping experienced officers in neighbourhood roles are ongoing challenges. This is especially the case against a challenging financial backdrop. Recruitment is currently paused and there remains an unfilled budget gap of circa £450 million for the financial year 2025. The following sections of this report will consider how these resources are performing against Hillingdon’s community safety priorities. 3. Performance on Key Community Safety Issues This section reviews recent performance data and initiatives in Hillingdon on priority community safety issues. It also examines public confidence in policing and efforts to engage the community, as well as the visibility of neighbourhood policing. Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 5 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 Crime trends and priorities: This report provides an overview of key crime trends in Hillingdon, along with the proactive measures being implemented to address these challenges. The Metropolitan Police, in partnership with the council and community organisations. When considering the figures below it is important to note that those concerning Theft and Motor Vehicle crime are currently including crimes that occur in Heathrow Airport. This skews the picture somewhat by showing crimes occurring in the borough that have not – this issue is being addressed. The key trends are: Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG): Domestic Abuse VAWG incidents have decreased by 7.8%, with 1,870 cases compared to 2,029 last year. Non-Domestic Abuse VAWG related violence has decreased by 7.9%, from 2,042 to 1,880 cases. The BCU has prioritised resourcing to, and expanded, its public protection department to enable improved investigations into domestic abuse, child abuse, exploitation, missing persons and other safeguarding related investigations driving improved outcomes for victims. At a tactical level, Hillingdon police have run targeted initiatives – for example, Project Vigilant which deploys uniformed and plain-clothes officers in the night-time economy to identify and deter predatory offenders around bars and clubs. Neighbourhood officers have also promoted the Street Safe program (encouraging women to anonymously pinpoint locations where they feel unsafe) and organized women’s safety focus groups and self-defence classes. These engagement efforts, alongside enforcement against high-risk offenders, aim to improve safety and confidence for female residents. Homicide: Homicide remains rare in Hillingdon, with only one recorded case this year, there were four offences last year. This represents a 75% decrease in year-to-date figures. All the offences were detected with the offenders currently residing in HMP. Although this is encouraging, each case remains a priority, and efforts continue to prevent serious violence. The homicide unit and specialist crime teams work closely to ensure rapid response and thorough investigations. Community reassurance measures, such as increased patrols following serious incidents, help maintain public confidence. Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 6 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 Violence with Injury: Year-to-date figures show a 9.6% decrease in violence with injury, with 1,860 incidents compared to 2,058 last year. However, the most recent four-week period saw a 21.5% increase, from 121 to 147 cases. This recent spike suggests a need for continued focus on violence reduction. Police have increased proactivity, investigations and apprehension of offenders in relation to this spike. They are tasking units to hotspots accordingly. This includes the use of stop and search in high-risk areas, alongside targeted operations to remove weapons. Partnership work with hospitals helps identify at-risk individuals, and youth engagement programmes aim to prevent reoffending. Personal Robbery: Personal robbery has seen an increase of 33.3% year-to-date, with 444 reported incidents compared to 341 in the same period last year. However, the most recent four-week period shows a slight 4.4% decrease, with 43 cases compared to 45 previously. While this suggests some short-term stabilisation, overall numbers remain a concern, particularly around public transport hubs and town centres. The police are deploying high- visibility patrols in key areas to deter offenders, while plain-clothes operations target known robbery hotspots and offenders. CCTV footage is being used more effectively in investigations. Additional resources have been brought onto the borough with specialist capabilities to help tackle this issue. Residential Burglary: Burglary rates have risen with 952 reported cases, up from 872 last year, increasing 4.4% FYTD. The most recent four-week period also shows an increase of 20.8%, with 122 incidents compared to 101 previously. Although still lower than historic highs, continued prevention efforts are necessary to reduce repeat offences and improve home security. The police are using crime analysis and predictive mapping techniques to target high- risk areas and offenders. This is coupled with enhanced patrols, reactive investigations and community engagement. Intelligence-led operations are focusing on disrupting organised burglary networks. Motor Vehicle Crime: Theft from vehicles has decreased by 6.8% year-to-date, with 1,901 cases compared to 2,040 last year. This doesn’t include the impact of counting Heathrow crimes. So the reduction at Hillingdon is actually higher. Theft of motor vehicles has increased by 22% from 749 to 941 offences FYTD. This is due to a recent spike in this crime type and counting Heathrow Crime Figures as part of Hillingdon figures. Police are enhancing patrols in known hotspot locations, including ANPR deployments, and deploying undercover teams to catch offenders. Businesses and local authorities are being encouraged to improve lighting and CCTV coverage, while the public is advised on securing valuables and using security markings. Police are working via the courts to utilise Criminal Behaviour Orders (CBOs) in order to deter prevent further offending. Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 7 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 Shoplifting: Theft from shops has increased by 83.6% year on year from 1,661 offences to 2,792 offences. This increase correlates with a new MPS stance on Shoplifting focusing on responding to incidents where persons are detained or using violence, investigating offences via Op Retail, targeting repeat offenders and repeat venues. Police have used a range of tactics including ‘sting’ style operations, arresting high harm offenders, target hardening venues and utilising Criminal Behaviour Orders. This is reflected in a detection rate of circa 26% which is currently the highest in the MPS in the last 4 weeks. The increase in the number of offences is therefore largely attributed to two factors: significant under reporting over prior years and increased reporting following the adoption of the new strategy; plus including Heathrow shoplifting figures in Hillingdon’s crime figures. Performance in terms of tackling shoplifting has increased substantially. Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB): ASB covers a range of lower-level incidents – from street drinking and noisy parties to vandalism and groups of youths causing nuisance – that can seriously affect residents’ quality of life. Hillingdon experiences a high volume of ASB calls; over 8,000 incidents of anti-social behaviour have been recorded FYTD. This figure includes reports to both police and council and shows that ASB is one of the most frequently raised community concerns. Persistent problems remain in specific localities – for example, repeated complaints about ASB in town centres such as Hayes, or estates troubled by graffiti and minor drug dealing. The police are working closely with the Council’s ASB and licensing teams to deploy the right tools against ASB, whether that be dispersal orders (temporary bans on groups in a hotspot), Partial Closure Orders (closing high rise building in Hayes to non- residents), Community Protection Warnings to problematic individuals, or environmental improvements (e.g. better lighting and CCTV through council programs, speedbumps in areas used for street racing). Monthly partnership meetings identify the top ASB locations and agree joint actions. Ward Safer Neighbourhood Teams have been instrumental in these efforts, as their local knowledge and regular presence provide reassurance to residents and enable early intervention. Continued attention to ASB is critical for public confidence – it is often the benchmark by which communities judge their day-to-day safety. Drug-related crime: Drug misuse and dealing are underlying drivers of various crimes in Hillingdon, including violence and burglary (as drug markets fuel turf disputes and addiction fuels theft). The borough’s proximity to Heathrow and major transport links also means it can be affected by “county lines” drug networks. FYTD, Hillingdon recorded approximately 900 drug offenses (possession or supply cases), which on a population basis is lower than the London average rate (Hillingdon is about 32% below the typical London rate for drug crime). This suggests that while drugs remain a concern, Hillingdon is not a major hotspot for drug trafficking compared to inner-city boroughs. Even so, local police carry out frequent drug warrants and operations – for example, targeting cannabis farms in rental properties and street-level dealing in parks. Drug offenses also have a relatively high “sanction detection” rate, meaning many result in an arrest or formal sanction, often because these crimes are caught proactively (e.g. finding drugs during a stop-and-search). The Safer Hillingdon Partnership’s priority on combatting drugs involves not just enforcement but also treatment and Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 8 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 prevention: the police refer individuals to drug outreach programs, and the Council commission’s services to help users exit addiction. The partnership recognises that reducing drug-related harm can, in turn, reduce associated crime and anti-social behaviour in the community. Public confidence and engagement initiatives: Public confidence in policing has been tested recently by widely publicised incidents of police misconduct and failure. In Hillingdon, as across London, the MPS has acknowledged the need to rebuild trust with the community. One way of doing this is through genuine community engagement and giving residents a greater voice in local policing. Hillingdon performs well in this space often being ranked 1st or 2nd in the MPS in terms of Public Trust and Confidence. Currently 78% of residents surveyed have ‘Trust in the Police’. Several initiatives are in place to boost confidence and ensure the police are listening to the public: Safer Neighbourhood Board & Ward Panels: Hillingdon has an active Safer Neighbourhood Board (SNB) – a borough-level forum of community representatives that meets with police leadership to discuss performance, priorities and public concerns. The SNB oversees independent projects (funded by the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime) to improve police- community relations and holds public meetings where residents can question senior officers. At the ward level, each of the borough’s wards has a panel (or forum) of residents and councillors that meets quarterly with the local DWO officers. These Ward Panels set neighbourhood priorities (such as speeding, burglary, or ASB on a particular estate) which the local police commit to address. By involving residents in priority-setting and reporting back on actions taken, the MPS aims to demonstrate responsiveness and transparency. Youth engagement and scrutiny: Hillingdon has introduced Youth Advisory Group – a platform for young people to share their experiences and feedback about policing tactics. The Hillingdon Youth Council is also represented on the Independent Advisory Group and Safer Neighbourhood Board. Furthermore, we run a bi-annual New Met for London event for youths. This two-way dialogue helps officers understand and adjust their approach to younger members of the community, hopefully improving fairness and respect. Additionally, young volunteers are directly involved in the delivery of policing in the form of Police Cadets. Engaging youths is crucial in Hillingdon, which has a large under-25 population, to prevent alienation and build trust with the next generation of residents. Community Monitoring Groups: To increase transparency around potentially controversial police powers, Hillingdon residents participate in Community Monitoring Groups (CMGs) that scrutinise police use of stop & search. There are 24 CMG meetings planned each year in the West Area (eight per borough) where local people review data on stop and search usage, outcomes, and demographic patterns. CMG members can even view Body Worn Video footage of actual stop-search encounters. This oversight helps assure the public that stop and search is conducted lawfully and without bias, and it allows community feedback to directly influence officer training or tactics. In addition, after any pre-planned use of extensive stop Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 9 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 powers (such as a section 60 order authorizing broad searches in a violence hotspot), the police hold debrief sessions with community representatives and council officials to review whether the actions were appropriate. These measures are intended to improve confidence by showing that the police welcome scrutiny and are willing to explain their actions. Public outreach and visibility: Hillingdon Police have sought to raise their profile in the community through positive interactions. Examples include regular “Street Surgeries” or drop- in stalls in town centres where residents can meet officers informally, and proactive communications via social media (sharing good-news stories, crime prevention advice, and updates on caught offenders). The police also work with the Council’s communications team and Neighbourhood Watch to publicise successful operations or joint initiatives, to reassure the public that progress is being made. Another important aspect of engagement is responding to public feedback: through surveys (like the MPS Public Attitude Survey) the police gather data on confidence levels and which issues people most want addressed. Recent reforms (described in the next section) are explicitly aimed at improving the way police interact with the public – “listening to local communities” and treating people with respect are core tenets of the new approach. The continued emphasis on ethics and openness is expected to, over time, translate into higher public confidence in Hillingdon. Neighbourhood policing and visibility: A consistent message from community engagement has been the need for high-visibility policing – residents want to see officers patrolling their areas and feel a personal connection to their local police. Hillingdon’s neighbourhood policing strategy reflects this: DWOs are kept free from emergency response duties so they can spend time on patrol in their wards, attend community events, and visit local schools and businesses. The Met is bolstering this approach with new investments. In fact, under the “New Met for London” reform plan, the MPS has committed to putting additional officers into local policing teams and increasing the number of PCSOs, with 500 extra PCSOs being recruited London- wide and about 240 officers re-assigned from central units to borough-based roles . Every London borough will also have at least one police front counter open 24 hours a day (for Hillingdon this means retaining a 24/7 public-access police station, namely Hayes) . These steps should enhance police visibility in the community. Furthermore, Hillingdon Borough now has a dedicated Superintendent, Chief Inspector and sector based Inspectors. Already in Hillingdon we have seen town centre teams and expanded ward teams focusing on high-footfall areas like Uxbridge town centre and Hayes, providing a uniformed presence to deter crime. Special tasking’s such as Operation Nightingale (an initiative started in Uxbridge to increase uniform patrols in crime hotspots and address long-term problems – which received over £100k funding for deployments) have further increased officer presence where needed . Visibility is not just about walking the beat; it’s also about responsiveness. Quick response times to calls and follow-up visits to victims can enhance the sense that police are there when you need them. In this regard, Hillingdon’s response teams have worked to meet target times (handling the majority of urgent calls within 15 minutes) and neighbourhood officers routinely make contact with victims of crimes like burglary to provide reassurance. The MPS acknowledges that genuine community policing – with officers embedded in and visible in the community – is at the heart of its mission to deliver “less crime, more trust and high Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 10 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 standards”. Continued support for neighbourhood policing in Hillingdon is therefore a critical performance objective, as it both prevents crime and builds public confidence. 4. A New Met for London – Reform & Local Impact In the wake of recent crises of confidence, the Metropolitan Police has launched an ambitious reform agenda known as “A New Met for London.” This two-year transformation plan (backed by £366 million investment) is the vision of Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley to achieve “More trust, less crime and higher standards” across London. The plan was in large part a response to the findings of the Baroness Casey Review, which called for fundamental change in the Met. The key themes of the reform can be summarised as fixing foundations, rebuilding trust, and boosting visibility: Fixing the Foundations: This refers to improving the internal systems, resources and professionalism of the police – essentially getting the basics right so officers are set up to succeed. It includes overhauling areas like recruitment, training, leadership, technology, and misconduct processes. For example, the Met has created a new Anti-Corruption & Abuse Command dedicated to “ruthlessly rooting out” officers and staff who are corrupt or predatory. They have also recognized the need for speed and assertiveness in discipline – accelerating the removal of those unfit for policing. Vetting and training regimes for new officers are being strengthened, with a review of how to better instil standards and practical skills early on. In short, the Met is doubling down on standards and integrity after acknowledging that “Chief Constables’ powers to deal with misconduct are too weak” under current rules. For Hillingdon, fixing foundations means that local officers should increasingly be better trained, better equipped, and held to the highest standards of conduct. Residents can expect, for instance, that new recruits joining Hillingdon’s teams will have been more rigorously vetted and more thoroughly prepared for the realities of frontline policing. Over time, as poor performers are weeded out, the calibre and morale of the local force should improve, enabling higher quality service to the public. Rebuilding Trust (Culture Change): The Commissioner’s plan emphasizes that policing must re-earn the trust of the communities it serves, especially after the damage of recent scandals. This involves a cultural shift within the Met – promoting values of respect, transparency, and community service. Practical measures under this theme include engaging with communities to co-produce local policing plans and being more responsive to public concerns. Sir Mark Rowley has highlighted that “trust is dented, it hasn’t gone away” and that the way to rebuild it is through positive work with communities fighting crime. In Hillingdon, this has meant officers redoubling efforts to listen to residents (through the forums and panels described earlier) and acting on feedback. It also means being honest about mistakes – for example, local police leaders have publicly acknowledged the Casey Report’s findings and reassured the Council and community that they are determined to change. London’s reforms also directly address VAWG: treating male predators as seriously as terrorists, with new approaches like using the Cambridge Crime Harm Index analytics to identify the top 100 high-risk offenders against women and girls. The impact locally is that Hillingdon’s most dangerous domestic abusers or Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 11 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 sex offenders are now receiving heightened attention from specialist units, which should increase prevention and enforcement in those cases. Another aspect of trust is accessibility: the pledge to have a 24/7 front counter in each borough is part of ensuring the public can reach police when needed. For Hillingdon residents, this commitment (along with improvements to the 101 non-emergency call service and online reporting) is meant to show that the Met is there for them and responsive. Increasing Visibility (Community Crime-Fighting): The plan recognises that community crime- fighting is how we cut crime, rebuild trust and restore our bond with communities. In practice, this means more officers out on the streets and a shift of focus towards local priorities. The Met has started moving resources from the back-office and certain central units into frontline policing – for example, as noted, 240 officers have been reassigned to local BCUs and an influx of 500 new PCSOs is underway to bolster neighbourhood teams . Each ward in London is to have at least 2 DWOs and 1 PCSO dedicated, which strengthens Hillingdon’s existing model. Additionally, the Met is investing in new equipment and technology to support visible policing. Officers are being issued modern mobile devices and apps that allow them to do more work while out in their community (so they don’t disappear back to the station to file reports). A new, unified crime-recording system called CONNECT was rolled out, which, despite some initial data teething problems (such as Heathrow Airport crimes being inadvertently counted in Hillingdon’s figures), will ultimately streamline how information is shared and allow officers to access crime data on the go. There is also ongoing investment in body-worn cameras (which all frontline officers in Hillingdon now wear) and other technology like better deployment of CCTV and analytics to pinpoint crime hotspots. For the public in Hillingdon, increased visibility should manifest as more frequent sight of police on patrol, more problem solving, proactive policing, targeting of offenders and quicker follow-ups when crimes are reported. 5. Strategic Challenges & Future Priorities Looking ahead, several strategic challenges will shape Hillingdon’s community safety landscape. At the same time, there are clear areas of focus that the police and partners will need to prioritize to meet these challenges. This section outlines the key hurdles and the planned priorities to address them: Ongoing Challenges: Increasing demand and complexity: Crime is evolving and becoming more complex. Investigations now often involve digital devices, online platforms, and cross-border elements, which require significant expertise and time. For example, a single fraud or stalking case might entail analysing thousands of messages or pieces of cyber evidence. Even gang crime and drug dealing are frequently coordinated via encrypted apps, complicating enforcement. The police must continuously adapt skills and tactics to keep up. Another aspect of complexity is the blurring line between crime and social issues – mental health crises or disputes that Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 12 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 escalate can fall to police by default. The rising demand across public services has meant police are regularly called to incidents that might better be handled by mental health professionals or social workers, stretching police capacity. This is exacerbated by the societal challenges of prison capacity, court backlogs and immigration. Tackling these challenges requires multi-disciplinary approaches and better coordination with other sectors (health, education, technology companies, etc.). It’s an ongoing challenge to ensure officers have the training, specialist support, and inter-agency protocols to deal with these complexities effectively. Effective prioritisation is essential and future resourcing constraints driven by ‘tough choices’ and a halt on recruitment will create further supply vs demand challenges. Demand vs. resources: Hillingdon, like all areas, faces the fundamental challenge of balancing growing demand for services with finite policing resources. Emergency and non-emergency calls continue to increase, as the population grows and new issues emerge. However, the police budget and officer numbers have limits with a circa £450 million funding gap. The Met’s budget constraints have been well documented – London has “close to 50% less funding per head of population” compared to some other major cities’ forces. While recent recruitment drives have boosted officer numbers, austerity in the past decade saw real-term pay cuts of ~17% for officers (2010–2022) and a reduction in experienced personnel. This can affect morale and retention, and thus service quality. In practical terms, West Area BCU must prioritize where to deploy officers at any given time. If a spate of burglaries hits one part of the borough, resources might be diverted there at the expense of routine patrols elsewhere. The challenge is how to do “more with less” – leveraging technology and smarter working to overcome the resource gap. The MPS is lobbying for sustained funding and a fair allocation of new officers to boroughs like Hillingdon, but economic pressures remain. The Committee should be aware that without adequate resources, maintaining low crime rates and rapid response times will be difficult, so advocating for Hillingdon’s needs in wider policing allocations is important. Public trust and confidence: Although reform efforts are underway, the trust deficit will not be repaired overnight. Historic incidents of racism, misogyny, and corruption within the Met (spotlighted by cases like the murder of Sarah Everard by a serving officer, and the Casey Review findings) have left some community members in Hillingdon sceptical or fearful of the police. Restoring trust is a long-term challenge; it requires consistent, positive interactions at the local level and demonstrable improvements in police conduct. Every instance of perceived unfairness or poor service in Hillingdon (e.g. a complaint of rude treatment, or a feeling that a crime report wasn’t taken seriously) can set back confidence. Conversely, visible efforts to hold officers accountable and to apologise and learn from mistakes can help rebuild faith. The Met’s leadership and the local BCU have acknowledged the scale of this challenge. The community’s patience may be limited, so it is critical that promised changes (like those in the New Met plan) yield visible results. The challenge for Hillingdon’s police will be maintaining the momentum of cultural change, continuing to engage with critics and communities that feel disenfranchised, and proving through actions that they are a service the public can trust. This extends to improving outcomes (solving crimes, supporting victims): trust will grow if people see that the police are effective and just. Low sanction detection rates for serious crimes, for instance, remain a concern that can erode confidence if not improved. Policing and Crime - Resident Services Select Committee 13 Chief Inspector Ben Wright 03/03/2025 6. Conclusion In summary, Hillingdon benefits from a committed policing team and multi-agency partnership that have kept overall crime rates comparatively low. Progress has been made on critical issues such as violence against women and girls, violence with injury, and homicide and key reform initiatives are underway to improve standards and public trust. However, challenges persist. Public confidence, while showing signs of recovery through local engagement efforts, remains fragile and must be continually reinforced by positive action. Certain crimes like robbery and anti-social behaviour continue to impact residents’ daily sense of safety and require sustained focus and innovation to address. The balance between growing demand and available resources will test the police’s ability to maintain performance. Header 1

Residents Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public COMMUNITY PAYBACK SCHEME Committee name Residents’ Services Select Committee Officer reporting Joanne Howells, Service Manager, Street Scene Enforcement Team Papers with report Appendix 1- Examples of Community Payback Work Undertaken in Hillingdon Ward All HEADLINES This report outlines the Probation Services operated Community Payback scheme and explains how it operates within Hillingdon Borough and how Council services utilise this scheme for local benefit. It also provides some examples of work carried out in the Borough. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Committee notes the information in the report and provides any feedback to officers. SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1. Community Payback is a scheme introduced to provide punishment or reparation for convicted offenders to 'pay back' the community for their crimes. It is unpaid work and is one of the options available t o courts when determining sentencing for o ffences. Individuals sentenced to do unpaid work undertake work on projects which benefit their local communities and can be sentenced to between 40 hours and 300 hours which should be completed within 12 months from sentencing. 2. The scheme is managed and delivered by the Probation Service and is a visible punishment which can tangibly improve local areas that have been harmed by crime . Community Payback also provides opportunities for individuals to learn new skills and increase the ir employability. O ffenders are supervised to conduct demanding, physical work within the community. Examples of the types of work undertaken include:  Graffiti removal  Street clean-ups  Ground clearance  Recycling projects  Building maintenance  Improvements to park and community facilities Residents Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public  Environmental preservation programmes  Landscaping and gardening projects  Painting and decorating in community centres and meeting places 3. Individuals are eligible to complete Education, Training and Employment (ETE) programmes as part of their unpaid work requirement, with up to 30% of their hours potentially available to complete the rehabilitative activities . For some offenders Unpaid Work can provide an opportunity to develop life and vocational skills that reduce the risk of reoffending. 4. Community engagement is strongly encouraged with Community Payback, and anyone can propose a project in their area via the nominations process on the Gov.uk website . www.gov.uk/nominate-community-payback-project. The work must:  Benefit the local community  Not take paid work away from others  Not make a profit for anyone 5. The main priority is the protection of the public , so individuals are assessed before assignment to a project of work. Th e assessment looks at an individual’s history, crimes committed and the risk they pose to the public. When carrying out Community Payback work, individuals are transported to and from the project, work in small teams and are supervised by fully trained officers. 6. The Community Payback Scheme is currently utilised within Hillingdon, when suitable projects are identified by the Street Scene Enforcement Team, usually through residents and members reports via the online reporting system. A tasking form is submitted to the Probation Service for assessment on viability and appropriateness. The Probation Service provide s a health and safety overview, provides the offenders to undertake the work, completes a risk assessment and manages the work projects. Hillingdon Council assists with waste removal, and provision of some equipment when required. 7. This scheme has been used since April 202 4 for litter clearance, to remove wast e and overgrown vegetation at the following locations:  Cowley Road, Uxbridge  Balmoral Drive, Hayes  Hillingdon Road, Uxbridge  Yeading Court, Hayes  Tollgate Drive, Hayes  Hillingdon Road  Uxbridge Road  Wood End Green Road  Rutters Close, West Drayton  Vineries Close, Sipson  Mondial Way, West Drayton  Boltons Way, West Drayton  Station Road, West Drayton Residents Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public  Harlington High Street, Harlington 8. The scheme also assisted with the removal of waste at the rear of Harefield civic amenity site which took several weeks to complete. Under the scheme follow up visits to sites which have been subject to earlier clearance may be carried out for maintenance. 9. Private and unregistered alleyways can be considered for community payback projects, but this is subject to the use of appropriate legislation to ensure work on this land can be lawfully carried out , notification to interested parties and a risk assessment from the Probation Service. RESIDENT BENEFIT Community Payback projects can help  Reduce crime and fear of crime.  Be identified by local communities as a priority.  Be visible to local communities.  Improve quality of life for the community. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS None LEGAL IMPLICATIONS None BACKGROUND PAPERS Nil.

Appendix 1 – Examples of Community Payback Work Undertaken in Hillingdon (before/after) PARKFIELD ROAD COWLEY ROAD YEADING LANE TOLGATE DRIVE RUTTERS CLOSE MONDIAL WAY

Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public The Hillingdon Council Chrysalis Scheme Committee name Residents’ Services Select Committee Officer reporting Neil O’Connor / Natasha Norton, Transport & Projects Papers with report Appendices - Chrysalis articles, Chrysalis criteria. Ward All HEADLINES An overview of the Council’s Chrysalis scheme The Chrysalis scheme was established on 15 February 2000 following a decision of the Policy Committee at that time. Each year a set amount is allocated to the Chrysalis Scheme. Applicants can apply for anywhere between £5000 and £100,000, provided the application meets the criteria clearly outlined on the webpage. At the end of the calendar year, the Cabinet Member is presented with the complete list of applications, and from that will select which projects they wish to proceed with in the next financial year. The Transport and Projects Community Officers are responsible for managing the Chrysalis scheme, from receiving the applications to completing the project. The current Cabinet Member with responsibility for the Scheme is Cllr Eddie Lavery, Cabinet Member for Community & Environment. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Residents’ Services Select Committee notes the infor mation provided and submits any comments to the Cabinet Member for consideration. SUPPORTING INFORMATION The information found in this report is to assist the Select Committee in obtaining a clear understanding of what the Chrysalis scheme is and how it works. Introduction The Chrysalis scheme, created 25 years ago, provides one -off capital funding for the improvement of Council-owned assets such as renovations of community facilities, parks improvements, and sporting facilities. The scheme currently distributes £1.5m, which can go anywhere across all areas of the Borough, giving residents the opportunity to create clean and attractive communities and assist the Council with meeting the Council Strategy 2022 -2026. Around £12.5 million has been spent on improving Council assets since the Chrysalis Scheme Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public began 25 years ago. Every year the Chrysalis Scheme is over subscribed. The list of projects presented to the Cabinet Member in 2024 was estimated at over £1.7million. In 2023 the projects were estimated at over £1.8 million. Since 2024, the Cabinet Member has allocated £1million to improv e five parks per year across the Borough. This includes for example, replacing bins, benches and noticeboards, planting Spring flowering bulbs, resurfacing paths, and works specific to each individual site, such as refurbishing the bandstand at Barra Hall Park. There can often be quite a variation between projects within the Chrysalis Scheme, with each one creating its own unique set of challenges. As well as working with residents and community groups, officers also need to work with a number of departments within the Council ; this too adding to the complexities of the Chrysalis scheme . These departments can include; Green Spaces, Capital Programmes, Planning, Property Services and Highways. Timeline The Chrysalis scheme continually rolls, with applicants able to submit suggestion s at any time. Work on projects tak es place throughout the year. There are, however, key dates, which are outlined below:  December - Applications are presented to the Cabinet Member.  February - When selected applications are often announced.  April - The start of the new financial year when work on the selected projects begins.  Mid-Summer - Should the budget allow, the Cabinet Member is once again presented with the Chrysalis applications, to select further projects.  March – The end of the financial year. Where possible the Council aims to complete the majority of projects by the end of March, (although this is not always possible.) Promotion Although the Chrysalis scheme is always oversubscribed, demonstrating its popularity, it is important to ensure the end results are showcased, thus promoting the scheme. Appendix 1 contains articles in Hillingdon People, highlighting the Chrysalis scheme and the many wonderful improvements made because of it. As well as using Hillingdon People, word of mouth is a powerful tool in promoting the Chrysalis scheme. To assist those looking to submit an application, there is a simple one-off application form on the Council’s website. The criteria are also listed there and are set out in Appendix 2 to this report. Match funding There are situations where projects are estimated at costing more than £100,000. In situations such as this match funding can be an option. An example of this is the resurfacing of the Green Spaces car park at Kings College Playing Fields. The project esti mate came in at just over £174,000. Being £74,000 over the maximum that the Chrysalis scheme can offer, the only way to complete the work was to seek additional funding. This was achieved with the help of Eastcote Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Hockey Club, who applied for £75,000 of HS2 funding. Officers worked closely with the hockey club manager throughout, and were successful in the bid, securing the extra funding. After nearly two years of work, the Council was able to transform what was an unsafe, unmarked gravel car park, full of potholes and suffering from constant pooling, into a newly resurfaced car park, which includes a drainage system, replacing the chain link fencing with hoop top railing s and gate to match, and road markings to maximise the amount of parking available. Th is work not only improved the overall aesthetics of the site but also made it safer to use. PERFORMANCE DATA Below outlines what officers deem to be the key performance indicator data that is collected as part of the Chrysalis Scheme , starting from the application through to completion of the project. As each project is managed on a case-by-case basis, the type and amount of key performance indicator data can and does vary. Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Pre-selection Overall Budget The overall budget allocated to the Chrysalis programme for the current financial year. Application form This contains contact details, location and description of the suggestion , and what benefits the suggestion would bring to the community . This information is recorded on a spreadsheet that continues to be updated throughout the process. Applicant / stakeholder requirements Meetings will be held with applicants, stakeholders, and contractors to go over the proposal, and plans will be written up . This information allows officers to get a thorough understanding of the applicant’s expectations, what is realistically possible, and how the work will best be carried out. Project budget estimate Approximately, how much will the project cost, ensuring it is above the minimum £5K, and does not exceed the maximum £100K. We do ask applicants if they can provide a cost estimate; sometimes they have this information to hand. It is, however, not mandatory, and officers themselves will seek this information. The above information will be used to create a PID (Project Initiation Document ,) a briefing note that is presented to the Cabinet Member to help them with their selection. Post Selection The next section outlines the type of data that is recorded following the selection of the applications: Quotations How much will the project cost, to ensure it is kept within budget. Timeframes How long will the project take to complete, when can the work begin and when will it finish. Invoice The final invoice is used to keep an accurate budget. updates / feedback Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Throughout the pro cess, any updates or feedback will be saved within the project folder . This could be at any time , and from any source. This feedback could be used to shape the current project, to help make future improvements to how we operate , or could simply be compliments on a job well done. RESIDENT BENEFIT The Chrysalis scheme provides those who are aged over 18 , and live or work in Hillingdon Borough with an opportunity to apply for funding to improve Council owned assets. Residents are encouraged to make suggestions for Chrysalis funding as the most effective way for local people to identify environmental and co mmunity safety projects, demonstrating how all residents can play an active part in decisions, making them proud to live in Hillingdon. Around £12.5 million has been spent on improving Council assets across the Borough, with funding available ranging from £5,000 to £100,000. Working towards the Council's vision of putting residents first, many of the Chrysalis projects meet the commitments of “The Strategy.” Provided the suggestion meets the criteria, which is clearly laid out on the web page just before the link to the application form, officers will do as much as they can to ensure the process is a s simplistic as possible for the applicant. Some applicants have a connection to their suggestion, for example they might be a member of a community centre, meaning they can provide far greater detail, whereas other s may have seen an asset they would like improved, such as their local playground. Overall, we aim to make the process as straightforward as possible, reducing the burden of responsibility on those applying for Chrysalis funding. Following rece ival of an application , various tasks need to be carried out before the PID is presented to the Cabinet Member. Each application is managed on a case-by-case basis. A non- exhaustive example of the types of tasks can be found below:  checking on the logistics of the suggestion.  liaising with other departments.  holding meetings, internally and on site.  sourcing quotes.  drawing up plans. Regarding those projects that are selected to progress with, once again the level of applicant involvement varies. Some applications require minimal applicant involvement, with officers completely managing the project themselves, whereas other s may see the applicant taking full control, such as receiving a grant to manage the project themselves. In this case officers are still there to offer assistance. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Each year a set amount is allocated to the Chrysalis scheme. Last year it was £1.5 million, with a proportion of this being spent on improving fiv e parks . The year before it was £1million. As Chrysalis funding is Capital, the projects must go through the normal Governance process before Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public any work can commence. As stated in the criteria, suggested projects must be no less than £5K and no more than £100K, except for exceptional proposals which in particular demonstrate a significant contribution towards the Council's 2030 carbon neutral commitment. In th ese circumstances the Cabinet Member would decide whether the application can be considered. Applications must not create any additional on-going financial commitment from the Council. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS As Chrysalis funding is Capital, a Capital Release Report will be submitted to Legal Services for review and approval. BACKGROUND PAPERS Nil. APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Chrysalis Articles in Hillingdon People Appendix 2 – Chrysalis criteria Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Appendix 1: Chrysalis articles in Hillingdon People: September / October 2024 Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Hillingdon People Jan / Feb 2024 Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public March April Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public June 2022 Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Appendix 2: Chrysalis criteria: Anyone who is 18 or over and lives, works or studies in Hillingdon can propose an improvement. Parents, guardians, teachers and youth leaders are welcome to make a submission on behalf of younger people provided that the adult's contact details are submitted. Funding criteria 1. Proposals for Chrysalis funding must clearly demonstrate an improvement to Council- owned assets to benefit the local community and will need to support priorities set out within Hillingdon's Strategic Climate Change Plan. This could include: - funding energy efficient measures and improvements to Council owned assets - investing in allotments whereby residents - particularly those who may not have gardens themselves - can be en couraged to grow their own food and compost organic waste where possible - continuing to add value to programmes improving town centres and local parades across the Borough, particularly in terms of improvements to help mitigate against flooding, as well a s measures that encourage residents who want to walk or cycle to local facilities - focusing Chrysalis investment on refurbishing and renovating the many existing playgrounds and outdoor gyms throughout the Borough to ensure that these continue to provide residents with free, quality, and convenient community amenities. 2. The proposal should be for one -off capital funding of at least £5,000 to a likely maximum of £100,000 to enhance a community facility without creating any additional on -going financial commitment from the Council. 3. Exceptional proposals, in particular those that demonstrate a significant contribution towards the Council's 2030 carbon neutral commitment may also be considered in excess of the £100k threshold. 4. Proposals from voluntary organis ations, community groups etc to enhance a Council- owned asset must have appropriate and current lease/license arrangements in place and not be in financial arrears to the Council. The proposal should demonstrate a clear benefit to the wider community (as per the item a above) and local support. 5. Local authority community-maintained schools, that can demonstrate a wider public benefit of the Chrysalis funding, (over and above educational merits expected from a school), can apply, provided that the proposal meets all other relevant criteria. 6. Buildings or facilities managed through Hillingdon Housing services, and their partners are Residents’ Services Select Committee - 13 March 2025 Classification: Public not eligible for Chrysalis funding. Neither are proposals that would undermine the Council's Strategic Climate Change Plan, such as introducing new lighting into parks and open spaces or using Council-owned green spaces to create new parking facilities. Chrysalis cannot fund events, activities or furniture and equipment.

Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Monitoring - update on the Residents’ Services Select Committee ’s Review of Alleygating in Hillingdon Committee name Residents' Services Select Committee Officer reporting Natasha Norton / Neil O’Connor Papers with report Appendix A – New alley gating signs Appendix B – 6 months residents feedback survey Appendix C – Hillingdon People Magazine article Ward All HEADLINES This report provides an updates on the procedural changes to the Alley Gating Scheme, following the Select Committee review, approved by Cabinet. RECOMMENDATION That the Residents’ Services Select Committee notes the updates regarding the Alley Gating Scheme following the Select Committee review that took place in 2023. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Below are the agreed recommendations further to the review with updates from officers: Recommendation 1 - Scheme Awareness That updated signs be installed on all alley gates to include the following information: a) that residents must keep the gates clear and closed when not in use; b) that residents are responsible for maintenance of the gates; and c) providing a Council contact email / website address where residents can access further details about the scheme in general. New signage will be created and installed on all alley gates in the future. Officers will work on the design for the leaflets which will be handed out to lead residents upon request. Recommendation 2 - Scheme Awareness That the alley gating scheme be promoted in Hillingdon People. The Corporate Communications Team will produce an article to promote the Alley Gating Scheme which will be featured in Hillingdon People. Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Recommendations 3&4 - Lead resident communications That, when sending its annual emails to verify the lead resident of each alley gating scheme, the Council’s expands this communication: • to include a review of any issues with the gates and any ASB which the Council could potentially assist, and;  to arrange t o send the lead resident a batch of flyers (after verification) to be dropped through letter boxes informing any new neighbours about the alley gating scheme in their area. That, in addition to the annual check, for brand new alley gating schemes officer s seek feedback from the lead resident six months after the gate has been installed. Lead Residents of new Alley Gating Schemes will be contacted six months after installation to gauge their feedback on the scheme, and to ensure any snagging issues are addressed. Lead Residents of older schemes will be contacted annually, to ensure contact details are kept up to date; this will give them an opportunity to report any issues. A live spreadsheet will continue to be updated. SUPPORTING INFORMATION The Council’s private alley gating scheme, introduced some 19 years ago, assists residents in securing their privately owned alleyways against intrusion by others by installing lockable gates which can dramatically improve the quality of life of residents and businesses. Not only can the gates reduce the likelihood of burglars gaining access to the rear of properties, but they can also protect the alley from fly-tipping and other anti-social behaviour. The scheme is popular with residents - in the 10 years from 2008 to 2018, a total of 112 schemes were implemented across the Borough. Over the years , extensive positive feedback has been received from residents who have benefitted from the increased security which the alley gating scheme provides. Residents organise the scheme themselves with initial financial support from the Council’s Chrysalis funding scheme which contributes up to 90% of the total cost of installing the gates. Residents then accept direct responsibility for the security of the keys and for the upkeep and repair of the gates once they have been installed. All ongoing maintenance including damage to, or loss of, gates is the sole responsibility of the residents - not the police or local authority. From April 2022, schemes installed more than ten years ago have a discretionary option for the Cabinet Member to agree to support the repair or replacement of gates based on the standard 90% Chrysalis Programme contribution to a new scheme. Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public UPDATES Since the Select Committee final report in July 2023, a further t hree new alley gating schemes have been installed servicing serviced 23 properties, and three refurbishments completed in the 2023/2024 financial year. In the 2024/2025 financial year, at the time of writing this report, seven new alley gating schemes have been installed, which are now servicing a total of 106 properties. As per recommendation A, signs have been installed at the seven schemes implemented in the 2024/2025 financial year. Please see Appendix A As per recommendation C , a survey was created , see Appendix B. To date, only two schemes have been installed more than 6 months ago; the lead residents were sent the survey requesting feedback. Officers have unfortunately not received a response from either lead resident. Since July 2023, the Chrysalis alley gating scheme was featured in the January/February 2024 Hillingdon People Magazine, see Appendix C. Officers are expecting another feature in one of the upcoming issues. Resident feedback can also be found in the Hillingdon People Magazine article in Appendix C. RESIDENT BENEFIT By installing lockable gates, the quality of life for residents and businesses can be dramatically improved. The most common reasons for gate installation are to prevent the alley from being used for drug taking, burglars gaining access to properties, fly-tipping, graffitiing, and other anti- social behaviour. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The minimal cost of new signage and annual flyers will be met within existing service budgets. There are no other direct financial costs arising from the recommendations in this report LEGAL IMPLICATIONS There are no legal implications arising from the recommendation set out within the report BACKGROUND PAPERS Nil. Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Appendix A Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Appendix B Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Appendix C

Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public RESIDENTS’ SERVICES SELECT COMMITTEE - CABINET FORWARD PLAN Committee name Residents’ Services Select Committee Officer reporting Liz Penny, Democratic Services Officer Papers with report Appendix A – Latest Forward Plan Ward As shown on the Forward Plan HEADLINES To monitor the Cabinet’s latest Forward Plan which sets out key decisions and other decisions to be taken by the Cabinet collectively and Cabinet Members individually over the coming year. The report sets out the actions available to the Committee. RECOMMENDATION That the Residents’ Services Select Committee notes the Cabinet Forward Plan. SUPPORTING INFORMATION The Cabinet Forward Plan is published monthly, usually around the first or second week of each month. It is a rolling document giving the required public notice of future key decisions to be taken. Should a later edition of the Forward Plan be published after this agenda has been circulated, Democratic Services will update the Committee on any new items or changes at the meeting. As part of its Terms of Reference, each Select Committee should consider the Forward Plan and, if it deems necessary, comment as appropriate to the decision -maker on the items listed which relate to services within its remit. For reference, the Forward Plan helpfully details which Select Committee’s remit covers the relevant future decision item listed. The Select Committee’s monitoring role of the Forward Plan can be undertaken in a variety of ways, including both pre-decision and post-decision scrutiny of the items listed. The provision of advance information on future items listed (potentially also draft reports) to the Committee in advance will often depend upon a variety of factors including timing or feasibility, and ultimately any such request would rest with the relevant Cabinet Member to decide. However, the 2019 Protocol on Overview & Scrutiny and Cabinet Relations (part of the Hillingdon Constitution) does provide guidance to Cabinet Members to:  Actively support the provision of relevant Council information and other requests from the Committee as part of their work programme.  Where feasible, provide opportunities for committees to provide their input on forthcoming executive reports as set out in the Forward Plan to enable wider pre -decision scrutiny (in addition to those statutorily required to come before committees , i.e. policy framework documents – see para. below). As mentioned above, there is both a constitutional and statutory requirement for Select Committees to provide comments on the Cabinet’s draft budget and policy framework proposals after publication. These are automatically scheduled in advance to multi-year work programmes. Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public Therefore, in general, the Committee may consider the following actions on specific items listed on the Forward Plan: Committee action When How 1 To provide specific comments to be included in a future Cabinet or Cabinet Member report on matters within its remit. As part of its pre-decision scrutiny role, this would be where the Committee wishes to provide its influence and views on a particular matter within the formal report to the Cabinet or Cabinet Member before the decision is made. This would usually be where the Committee has previously considered a draft report or the topic in detail, or where it considers it has sufficient information already to provide relevant comments to the decision-maker. These would go within the standard section in every Cabinet or Cabinet Member report called “Select Committee comments”. The Cabinet or Cabinet Member would then consider these as part of any decision they make. 2 To request further information on future reports listed under its remit. As part of its pre-decision scrutiny role, this would be where the Committee wishes to discover more about a matter within its remit that is listed on the Forward Plan. Whilst such advance information can be requested from officers, the Committee should note that information may or may not be available in advance due to various factors, including timescales or the status of the drafting of the report itself and the formulation of final recommendation(s). Ultimately, the provision of any information in advance would be a matter for the Cabinet Member to decide. This would be considered at a subsequent Select Committee meeting. Alternatively, information could be circulated outside the meeting if reporting timescales require this. Upon the provision of any information, the Select Committee may then decide to provide specific comments (as per 1 above). 3 To request the Cabinet Member considers providing a draft of the report, if feasible, for the Select Committee to consider prior to it being considered formally for decision. As part of its pre-decision scrutiny role, this would be where the Committee wishes to provide an early steer or help shape a future report to Cabinet, e.g., on a policy matter. Whilst not the default position, Select Committees do occasionally receive draft versions of Cabinet reports prior to their formal consideration. The provision of such draft reports in advance may depend upon different factors, e.g., the timings required for that decision. Ultimately any request to see a draft report early would need the approval of the relevant Cabinet Member. Democratic Services would contact the relevant Cabinet Member and Officer upon any such request. If agreed, the draft report would be considered at a subsequent Select Committee meeting to provide views and feedback to officers before they finalise it for the Cabinet or Cabinet Member. An opportunity to provide specific comments (as per 1 above) is also possible. 4 To identify a forthcoming report that may merit a post- decision review at a later Select Committee meeting As part of its post-decision scrutiny and broader reviewing role, this would be where the Select Committee may wish to monitor the implementation of a certain Cabinet or Cabinet Member decision listed/taken at a later stage, i.e., to review its effectiveness after a period of 6 months. The Committee should note that this is different to the use of the post-decision scrutiny ‘call-in’ power which seeks to ask the Cabinet or Cabinet Member to formally re-consider a decision up to 5 working days after the decision notice has been issued. This is undertaken via the new Scrutiny Call-in App members of the relevant Select Committee. The Committee would add the matter to its multi-year work programme after a suitable time has elapsed upon the decision expected to be made by the Cabinet or Cabinet Member. Relevant service areas may be best to advise on the most appropriate time to review the matter once the decision is made. Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public BACKGROUND PAPERS  Protocol on Overview & Scrutiny and Cabinet relations adopted by Council 12 September 2019  Scrutiny Call-in App

Ref Scheduled Upcoming Decisions Further details Ward(s) Final decision by Full Council Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Consultation related to the decision NEW ITEM Public or Private (with reason) 278 Update on proposals for an Additional Licensing Scheme for HMO properties Following the Full Council motion on 11 July 2024 to consider extending licensing obligations for Houses of Multiple Occupation, Cabinet's consideration of the way forward in October 2024, Cabinet will receive a further update on the matter. All Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing Growth Residents' Services P - Richard Webb / Stephanie Waterford Dan Kennedy TBC NEW ITEM Public 277 Rural Activities Garden Centre Cabinet will receive a report on the future of the Rural Activities Garden Centre. Colham & Cowley Cllr Eddie Lavery - Community & Environment Residents' Services Nicola Herbert Karrie Whelan Service led consultations NEW ITEM Public 275 Uxbridge Golf Course and Haste Hill Golf Course Following Cabinet's consideration of the future operation of the Golf Courses in November 2023 and subsequent decisions, Cabinet will consider a further report to consider the future of the Council run golf courses. Ickenham & South Harefield / Northwood Cllr Eddie Lavery - Community & Environment Residents' Services Nicola Herbert / James Raven Karrie Whelan Public 238 The provision of a specialist grounds maintenance, horticultural and landscaping contract Cabinet will be asked to consider the award of a grounds maintenance, horticultural and landscaping contract for a period of three years with optional extension of a further two years. This contract will support works required by the Green Spaces Team in its parks, gardens and open public spaces and can also be utilised by other Council departments. All Cllr Eddie Lavery - Community & Environment Residents' Services Nicola Herbert / Allison Mayo Karrie Whelan Private (3) 273 Rough Sleeping Prevention and Recovery Grant Based on the Rough Sleeping Prevention and Recovery Grant received. Cabinet will consider the necessary arrangements to provide services to support initiatives aimed at preventing and addressing rough sleeping. N/A Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing Growth Residents' Services Lee Robinson / Sally Offin Dan Kennedy Private (3) SI Strategic Climate Action Plan Hillingdon Council passed a Climate Change Declaration at its full Council meeting on 16 January 2020 which set out the ambition to become carbon neutral across the Council’s services by 2030. Cabinet in 2024 agreed a review of the Strategy and also public consultation to inform a revised Plan, which Cabinet will consider at this meeting. All Cllr Eddie Lavery - Community & Environment Residents' Services Ian Thynne Karrie Whelan Public Consultation / Residents' Services Select Committee Public 269 Air Quality Action Plan The Council’s Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) is in the process of being updated for the next five-year period. Following consultation, Cabinet will consider an updated Plan for approval. All Cllr Eddie Lavery - Community & Environment Residents' Services Ian Thynne Karrie Whelan Public Consultation / Residents' Services Select Committee Public SI = Standard Item each month/regularly Cabinet meeting - Thursday 10 April 2025 (report deadline 19 March) 1 Ref Scheduled Upcoming Decisions Further details Ward(s) Final decision by Full Council Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Consultation related to the decision NEW ITEM Public or Private (with reason) SI = Standard Item each month/regularly 270 Local List of Architectural and Historical Importance Cabinet will consider a proposal to locally list The Orchard Pub in Ruislip and the North Hayes Telephone Exchange. This will follow feedback from a public consultation and interested stakeholders. Ruislip / Hayes Town Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing Growth Residents' Services Antonia Whatmore, Mathieu Rogers Karrie Whelan Public Consultation Public 260b Early review of current Public Spaces Protection Order 2023 Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO) are reviewed every 3 years, the last being in 2023. Subject to Cabinet agreeing to consult on a revised PSPO in January, this report will consider the outcome of that, before a final decision on PSPOs is approved. All Cllr Eddie Lavery - Community & Environment Residents' Services Joanne Howells / Stephanie Waterford Dan Kennedy Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services N/A Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services TBC TBC Public 283 Outcome of consultation on Garden Waste Collection Charging Following Cabinet agreement on 20 February 2024 to invite the views of residents and consult on proposals to charge for the garden waste collection service, the Cabinet Member will duly consider the outcome of the consultation, along with any environment and equalities impact assessments, before making any decision. All Cllr Eddie Lavery - Community & Environment, / with Cllr Martin Goddard, Cabinet Member for Finance & Transformation Residents' Services Nicola Herbert Karrie Whelan Public consultation NEW ITEM Public 186b Uxbridge Town Centre Vision Following Cabinet approval in October 2024 to commence full public and stakeholder engagement on a proposed draft new masterplan / vision for Uxbridge, Cabinet will consider the outcome of the engagement exercise and receive the final vision for consideration. The Vision will form the basis for a consensus on the future redevelopment and prosperity of the town. Uxbridge / all wards Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing Growth Residents' Services Julia Johnson Karrie Whelan Public engagement and also select committee Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. Various All TBC Democratic Services N/A Various Public Cabinet Member Decisions expected - April 2025 Cabinet meeting - Thursday 22 May 2025 (report deadline 30 April) 2 Ref Scheduled Upcoming Decisions Further details Ward(s) Final decision by Full Council Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Consultation related to the decision NEW ITEM Public or Private (with reason) SI = Standard Item each month/regularly SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services TBC Public SI Annual Performance Report Cabinet will receive an annual report performance report, setting out how the Council is delivering on key service metrics and the Council Strategy. All All Cabinet Members All Ian Kavanagh Matthew Wallbridge Select Committees will also consider the annual report at their meetings. NEW ITEM Public SI Temporary Accommodation Action Plan Monitoring Cabinet will receive a quarterly update, or at a frequency as determined by the Cabinet Member, on progress on the delivery of the Temporary Accommodation Strategy and Action Plan presented to Cabinet in February 2025. This will be aligned with the Homelessness Prevention and Rough Sleeping Strategy and the Medium-Term Financial Strategy, which is to include details of actions taken to bring empty homes across the Borough back into occupation. All Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing Growth Residents' Services Debbie Weller Dan Kennedy NEW ITEM Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services N/A TBC Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services TBC Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services N/A TBC Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services TBC Public SI Standard Items taken each month by the Cabinet Member Cabinet Members make a number of non-key decisions each month on standard items - details of these are listed at the end of the Forward Plan. Various All Democratic Services TBC Various Public Cabinet meeting - 26 June 2025 (report deadline 4 June) Cabinet meeting - 24 July 2025 (report deadline 2 July) Cabinet Member Decisions expected - July 2025 Cabinet meeting - Thursday 18 September 2025 (report deadline 27 August) 3 Ref Scheduled Upcoming Decisions Further details Ward(s) Final decision by Full Council Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Consultation related to the decision NEW ITEM Public or Private (with reason) SI = Standard Item each month/regularly SI Temporary Accommodation Action Plan Monitoring Cabinet will receive a quarterly update, or at a frequency as determined by the Cabinet Member, on progress on the delivery of the Temporary Accommodation Strategy and Action Plan presented to Cabinet in February 2025. This will be aligned with the Homelessness Prevention and Rough Sleeping Strategy and the Medium-Term Financial Strategy, which is to include details of actions taken to bring empty homes across the Borough back into occupation. All Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing Growth Residents' Services Debbie Weller Dan Kennedy NEW ITEM Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services N/A TBC Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services TBC Public SI Strategic Climate Action Plan Hillingdon Council passed a Climate Change Declaration at its full Council meeting on 16 January 2020 which set out the ambition to become carbon neutral across the Council’s services by 2030. Cabinet will receive a progress update on it's latest Action Plan. All Cllr Eddie Lavery - Residents' Services Residents' Services Ian Thynne Karrie Whelan Public Consultation / Residents' Services Select Committee Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services N/A TBC Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services TBC Public 286 Tender contract for the collection & treatment of Co- mingled dry mixed recycling Cabinet will receive an update on the current position within the dry mixed recycling materials market and potential legislative changes which may impact the way that the Council operates its recycling collections in the future. In considering this, Cabinet will consider a supplier for such services, after competitive tender. N/A Cllr Eddie Lavery - Residents' Services Residents' Services Daniel Long Karrie Whelan NEW ITEM Private (3) SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services N/A TBC Public Cabinet meeting - Thursday 23 October 2025 (report deadline 1 October) Cabinet meeting - Thursday 20 November 2025 (report deadline 29 October) 4 Ref Scheduled Upcoming Decisions Further details Ward(s) Final decision by Full Council Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Consultation related to the decision NEW ITEM Public or Private (with reason) SI = Standard Item each month/regularly SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services TBC Public SI Temporary Accommodation Action Plan Monitoring Cabinet will receive a quarterly update, or at a frequency as determined by the Cabinet Member, on progress on the delivery of the Temporary Accommodation Strategy and Action Plan presented to Cabinet in February 2025. This will be aligned with the Homelessness Prevention and Rough Sleeping Strategy and the Medium-Term Financial Strategy, which is to include details of actions taken to bring empty homes across the Borough back into occupation. All Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing Growth Residents' Services Debbie Weller Dan Kennedy NEW ITEM Public SI Infrastructure Funding Statement Cabinet will receive an annual report setting out the Council's Infrastructure Funding Statement, a document it is required to publish which also monitors spending on section 106 (developer contribution) monies along with the Community Infrastructure levy over the past year. All Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing & Growth Residents' Services Andrew Tebbutt Karrie Whelan Residents' Services Select Committee Public SI 2026/27 Budget and Future Medium-Term Financial Strategy (BUDGET FRAMEWORK) This report will set out the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS), which includes the draft General Fund reserve budget and capital programme for 2026/27 for consultation, along with indicative projections for the following four years. This will also include the HRA rents for consideration and Council Tax Reduction Scheme proposals following consultation. All Proposed Full Council adoption - 26 February 2026 Cllr Martin Goddard - Finance & Transformation All Andy Goodwin Richard Ennis Public consultation through the Select Committee process and statutory consultation with businesses & ratepayers Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services N/A Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services TBC TBC Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services N/A Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services TBC TBC Public Cabinet meeting - Thursday 19 February 2026 (report deadline 28 January 2026) Cabinet meeting - Thursday 18 December 2025 (report deadline 26 November) Cabinet meeting - Thursday 15 January 2026 (report deadline 12 December 2025) 5 Ref Scheduled Upcoming Decisions Further details Ward(s) Final decision by Full Council Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Consultation related to the decision NEW ITEM Public or Private (with reason) SI = Standard Item each month/regularly SI 2026/27 Budget and Future Medium-Term Financial Strategy (BUDGET FRAMEWORK) Following consultation, this report will set out the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS), which includes the draft General Fund reserve budget and capital programme for 2026/27 for consultation, along with indicative projections for the following four years. This will also include the HRA rents for consideration. All Proposed Full Council adoption - 26 February 2026 Cllr Ian Edwards - Leader of the Council / Cllr Martin Goddard - Finance & Transformation All Andy Goodwin Richard Ennis Public consultation through the Select Committee process and statutory consultation with businesses & ratepayers Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services N/A Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services TBC TBC Public SI Temporary Accommodation Action Plan Monitoring Cabinet will receive a quarterly update, or at a frequency as determined by the Cabinet Member, on progress on the delivery of the Temporary Accommodation Strategy and Action Plan presented to Cabinet in February 2025. This will be aligned with the Homelessness Prevention and Rough Sleeping Strategy and the Medium-Term Financial Strategy, which is to include details of actions taken to bring empty homes across the Borough back into occupation. All Cllr Steve Tuckwell - Planning, Housing Growth Residents' Services Debbie Weller Dan Kennedy NEW ITEM Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services N/A Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services TBC TBC Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC All Cabinet Members All Democratic Services N/A Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All All TBC Democratic Services TBC TBC Public Cabinet meeting - Thursday 23 April 2026 (report deadline 1 April 2026) Cabinet meeting - Thursday 19 March 2026 (report deadline 25 February 2026) 6

Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public RESIDENTS’ SERVICES SELECT COMMITTEE - WORK PROGRAMME Committee name Residents’ Services Select Committee Officer reporting Liz Penny, Democratic Services Officer Papers with report Appendix A – Work Programme Ward All HEADLINES To enable the Committee to note future meeting dates and to forward plan its work for the current municipal year. RECOMMENDATION: That the Residents’ Services Select Committee considers the Work Programme report and agrees any amendments. SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1. The Committee's meetings will start at 7pm and the witnesses attending each of the meetings may include representatives from external organisations, some of whom travel from outside of the Borough. Forthcoming meeting dates are as follows: Meeting Date Room 13 June 2024 CR5 18 July 2024 CR6 24 September 2024 CR6 27 November 2024 CR5 14 January 2025 CR5 19 February 2025 CR5 13 March 2025 CR5 22 April 2025 CR5 Site Visits Members of the Residents’ Services Select Committee have undertaken a number of site visits to include the CCTV room in the Civic Centre, Harlington Road Depot, Heathrow Imported Food Office, Hillingdon Fire Station , Botwell Leisure Centre , Breakspear Crematorium, the Recycling Centre at Edmonton and visits with the Traffic Wardens and the Noise Team. Implications on related Council policies The role of the Select Committees is to make recommendations on service changes and improvements to the Cabinet, who are responsible for the Council’s policy and direction. Residents’ Services Select Committee – 13 March 2025 Classification: Public How this report benefits Hillingdon residents Select Committees directly engage residents in shaping p olicy and recommendations and the Committees seek to improve the way the Council provides services to residents. Financial Implications None at this stage. Legal Implications None at this stage. BACKGROUND PAPERS Nil.

MULTI-YEAR WORK PROGRAMME 2022 - 2026 2025/26 January February March April May June July September November January February 14 19 13 22 No meeting 12 15 9 6 Review: Homeless Prevention and the Customer Journey Topic selection / scoping stage Witness / evidence / consultation stage Findings, conclusions and recommendations Findings Final review report agreement Final report Target Cabinet reporting Cabinet Regular service & performance monitoring Infrastructure Funding Statement Update (previously CIL Expenditure Monitoring - Annual Report & S106) each November - Julia Johnson X Mid-year budget / budget planning report - Andy Goodwin / Richard Ennis X Strategic Climate Action Plan Update each Nov - Ian T (to Cabinet in September) X Cabinet's Budget Proposals For Next Financial Year X Cabinet Forward Plan Monthly Monitoring X X X X X X X X Parking Annual Report - Richard Webb X Annual Performance Report (Ian Kavanagh) - DK and KW to attend to answer qus. X Annual Complaints Submission to the Housing Ombudsman Service (Rod Smith/Debbie W) - Sam Strong or Gary Penticost to present the report X One-off information items ASB Service Update (with updated FPN figures) X Graffiti Removal Sports - facilities, engagement & inclusivity Animal Welfare X Consultation on Uxbridge Master Plan Housing Allocation Policy Consultation Draft Heathrow Investment X Heathrow Expansion X Abandoned Vehicles X Regeneration of Town Centres (Chambers of Commerce, Hayes T Partnership, Uxb BID) X Success of Chrysalis Project X Trading Standards - Tackling Underage Drinking / Vaping X Licensing of Fun Fairs and enforcement measures for flyposting (Steph / Nicola Herbert) X Community Payback Scheme - structure of the Scheme (Jo Howells / Richard Webb) X Noise Team Structure, success of enforcement measures and update on site visit X Review of Statement of Gambling Policy - policy framework consultation Sport for Young People - how the Council encourages participation in deprived areas X APCOA Parking Enforcement - income / contract cost (Freddie Mohammed) X The condition of allotments in the Borough X Heathrow Employment and Skills Academy X Crime & Disorder - Statutory Scrutiny (themed) Safer Hillingdon Partnership Development Safer Hillingdon Partnership Performance X X Past review delivery Update on Alley Gating Review X Review of Empty Homes Council Tax Premium X Internal use only Report deadline Agenda publication dateCommittee Site Visits CCTV Control Room, Civic Centre (25 July 2022 and 4 November 2024) Botwell Leisure Centre (27 February 2024) Harlington Road Depot (28 September 2022) Weed Killing Contractor (6 June 2023) Heathrow Airport (Imported Food Office) (4 October 2022) Out of Hours Noise Team (1 November 2024) Hillingdon Fire Station (7 December 2022) Graffiti Removal Breakspear Crematorium (25 January 2023) Harefield and Yiewsley Civic Amenity Sites Traffic wardens / Abandoned Vehicles - 24 and 25 February 2025 at 5pm Canal Visit - 1 November 2023 The Battle of Britain Bunker (26 July 2023 at 6pm) Building Control Planning Enforcement HS2 Site Visit Dogs Trust Edmonton Recycling Centre (Tuesday 4 September 2024 - 09:45 - 10:45) Custody Suite - Polar Park, Heathrow Employment and Skills Academy, Heathrow Uxbridge / Ruislip Lido Mortuary Residents' Services Select Committee