Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Becky Haggar with Councillor Ekta Gohil substituting.

None.

Members noted that the November meeting would consider the Youth Offer Delivery Model update, and asked if it would be possible to invite the Youth Forum to the meeting. This would be looked into.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the previous meeting be agreed.

Officers introduced the briefing note on in-year admissions.

Members asked if asylum-seeking children were still residing in airport hotels or if they were being accommodated elsewhere. Officers responded that there were no unaccompanied asylum-seeking children in hotels in the area. The Local Authority provided timely accommodation and ensured transfer to the appropriate local authority under the National Transfer Scheme where appropriate. There were a number of children with their families residing in local hotels which were used by the Home Office. Asylum-seeking children received educational provisions such as ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages).

Members further asked about the use of airport hotels for asylum-seekers and for how long this may continue. Officers noted that there were a number of hotels in use around Heathrow which had been set up as they were available during the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of hotels being used had decreased, but some were still in use. Some had been stood down.

Members asked about the tightness in years 9 and 10, particularly in the south of the borough. Officers acknowledged this and noted that some schools had not shared their numbers. The Fair Access Panel was used to place hard-to-place children who had been out of education for a period of time.

Members noted the complex issue of children living in Hillingdon but attending private schools outside the borough who were struggling to find school places within the borough. There was a case of a private school finishing at Year 8 and a young person had been on the waiting list of nearby schools for three years. Officers responded that they actively looked at vacancies in surrounding schools that were local to the home address. The Fair Access Panel could be utilised for children without a school place.

Members asked about the impact of the new government's 20% VAT on private schools, which may force children into new schools mid-year if parents could no longer afford the fees. Officers noted that prior to the General Election they had received lots of enquiries regarding vacancies in the borough. Officers had also received 59 applications between June and 13 September from parents of children attending private schools. Of these, 29 were for secondary places and 30 for primary places and across all year groups. These applications were being processed, and officers continued to monitor the situation.

Members asked if the 59 applications were for children with SEND provision or from SEND schools. Officers confirmed that the 59 applications were from mainstream private schools. Applications from special independent schools would go through the SEND team.

Members cited research from the Taxpayers Alliance which suggested that the new VAT policy may cost taxpayers more money. Members asked about receiving any uplift from Government. There was no indication of this but officers were due to attend the London Council's meeting on 14 October to discuss the impact of private school applications on Local Authorities. Officers assured Members that the right processes were in place to address applications in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

Officers introduced the Hillingdon Safeguarding Partnership Annual Report.

The Safeguarding Partnership was made up of three statutory partners: the Local Authority, the ICB, and the Metropolitan Police. Each partner shared equal responsibility for safeguarding adults and children in Hillingdon. New working together to safeguard children guidance issued at the end of 2023 emphasised the importance of including education as a statutory partner, although this was not yet enshrined in legislation.

Hillingdon had mirrored arrangements across children’s and adult’s safeguarding, reporting to the same Executive Leadership Group. This approach, known as ‘think family,’ ensured that child-focused practitioners considered the adults and parents, and adult-focused practitioners considered the impact on children. The aim was to avoid duplication and to be as efficient as possible, given that many agencies worked with both adults and children.

In addition to the statutory partners, there were various relevant agencies involved in the safeguarding boards and sub-groups. These agencies attended the safeguarding boards and specific sub-groups. For example, the Centre for Expertise for Child Sexual Abuse was involved with the child sexual abuse sub-group.

The partnership actively engaged with children and young people in Hillingdon through direct meetings with Children in Care Councils, child in need forums, and children subject to CP plans, actively seeking views of the young people. This engagement ensured that their views were heard and incorporated into the partnership's work. Co-production involved working with children and young people to identify their priorities and ensure their input was threaded through the partnership's activities.

The partnership had undertaken various awareness-raising activities, including briefings on mental health issues and what it is like to be a young person with mental health difficulties, cultural literacy in safeguarding practice, suicide prevention, and child exploitation. Training was provided through practice briefings, commissioned training, and free webinars accessible to representatives of any agency, including the charity and voluntary sectors.

Young people had delivered their annual report to the Safeguarding Board and the Executive Leadership Group, which comprised the most senior representatives of the statutory partners. There had been various sessions with Board members talking about ‘You Said, We Did’ – what young people had said and what officers had done in response. Young people had also delivered Walking In Our Shoes training to a number of different agencies, including police officers, nurses and Designated Safeguarding Leads.

There were free webinars available which would enable them to be accessible to the charity and voluntary sector.

All sub-groups followed a simple framework of prevention, identification, and response. This framework guided their work on issues such as child sexual abuse from a multi-agency perspective. Officers noted the NSPCC’s PANTS campaign, which was a preventative programme aimed at reducing the risk of sexual abuse. PANTS was an acronym for: Privates are private; Always remember your body belongs to you; No means no; Talk about secrets that upset you; and Speak up, someone can help.

The partnership had made progress in launching the Contextual Safeguarding Strategy, which addressed risks faced by children and young people  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

The minutes of the Corporate Parenting Panel were noted.

It was also noted that the structure of the meetings and the presentation of the reports were currently under review.

The Chair highlighted that the health representatives had noted that Hillingdon had the best Corporate Parenting Panel that they had attended and commended the inclusion of young people in the meetings. This was acknowledged and celebrated by the Committee.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the Corporate Parenting Panel be noted

Members considered the Forward Plan.

Members noted that the Youth Justice Plan which was scheduled for October Cabinet.

Members raised a query regarding the SEND Sufficiency Strategy, and whether this would include anything on the CQC and Ofsted joint Area SEND inspection of Hillingdon Local Area Partnership, given that the response to the inspection was expected in mid-October and the SEND Sufficiency Strategy was expected to be on the Committee’s agenda for November. This would be looked into.

RESOLVED: That the Children, Families and Education Select Committee noted the Cabinet Forward Plan

Members considered the Work Programme.

It was noted that witness session 4 of the Committee’s review into Persistent Absenteeism had taken place in August. Members noted that this was a very insightful and enlightening session. Minutes from this session were being finalised and would be circulated to Members.

A possible witness session with parents and carers was highlighted and this was being explored.

Members suggested that officers compile the minutes from each witness session and share with Members prior to the next Committee, to inform discussion on possible findings, conclusions and recommendations.

Members asked about the SEND Strategy update and whether this would include anything on the CQC and Ofsted joint Area SEND inspection of Hillingdon Local Area Partnership.

Members also noted the Youth Offer update, and asked if this would include an audit of activities in different areas. It was noted that any additional information could be requested following the November Committee if necessary. Members highlighted the need for information on activities in specific areas, noting that while some information was available on the Council's website, it was not comprehensive for all areas. It was proposed to ask for a snapshot of the Council's offerings to young people for a specific month, such as September, to be included to provide a clearer picture.

RESOLVED: That the Children, Families and Education Select Committee considered the report and agrees any amendments