Agenda item

Ian Kavanagh, Head of Business Intelligence, and Julia Johnson, Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth, were in attendance to respond to Members’ questions and requests for clarification in relation to the information in the report included in the agenda pack.

A question was asked by the Committee about whether the figure of 245 new Council properties represented a net figure after accounting for Right to Buy losses. It was clarified that the figure referred to gross new acquisitions. It was noted that a significant spike in Right to Buy applications had occurred when discounts were reduced, similar to trends experienced by other local authorities. It was explained that it was difficult to determine how many applications would ultimately convert.

Concerns were raised by Members about underreporting of fly-tipping incidents and the inability of operatives to record data effectively. A query was made regarding measures to capture accurate data. In response, it was confirmed that reporting had been promoted through communication channels, including social media and newsletters. Officers acknowledged increasing pressure from fly-tipping and outlined actions such as responsive collection services, bulky waste collection, and targeted engagement in hotspot areas. It was emphasised that outreach to residents in flats and provision of accessible disposal sites were part of a blended approach.

Further concerns were expressed about recurring fly-tipping despite action days and about contamination of recycling leading to waste being disposed of as general refuse. A question was also raised by Councillors regarding the proportion of contaminated recycling within household waste. It was stated that figures would need to be obtained and reported back to the Committee.

The Committee enquired about audits of resident services datasets, error rates, and remediation plans. Officers explained that specific figures were not available at the meeting, but data quality reporting and processes such as standardisation and normalisation were in place to improve accuracy.

Members raised queries regarding the decline in service requests and whether this reflected positive outcomes, as feedback from residents suggested otherwise. It was reported that new sweepers had been introduced to address weed control and detritus quickly, and positive feedback had been received regarding their deployment.

Clarification was sought on the meaning of “refreshing” the local plan and justification for associated costs. It was explained that a statutory review was required every five years, and a full review had commenced. The process involved consultations, evidence gathering, housing need assessments, employment land analysis, site identification, and a green belt review, which accounted for the budget allocation.

With regard to the increase in ASB reports, Councillors enquired whether this reflected improved reporting or worsening conditions. It was confirmed that growth was largely due to easier reporting via online tools. It was noted that ASB encompassed a broad range of issues, and approximately half of reported cases were actionable.

Further queries were raised by the Committee in relation to engagement with housing associations. It was explained that liaison occurred on a case-by-case basis, with social landlords expected to take the lead in resolving issues.

Members sought further clarification regarding IT system readiness for integration and how residents would access information. It was stated that existing systems captured most required data, and no major issues were anticipated. Future changes would depend on finalised metrics. It was confirmed that data would be made freely available and efforts would be made to present information transparently.

Councillors queried whether businesses attending the Hillingdon Take Off conference had been consulted on regeneration plans. It was reported that an investor conference had been held, and programmes funded through the UK Shared Prosperity Fund had supported local business engagement. Initiatives included town centre projects, an innovation hub, and development of an economic growth plan.

Further questions were raised about collaboration with Heathrow. It was confirmed that a roundtable summit had been organised to align resources with local priorities.

Members queried how Hillingdon’s recycling rates compared to London averages and strategies for improvement. It was reported that recycling rates had continued to increase, supported by initiatives such as food waste segregation and campaigns to reduce household waste.

With regards to fly tipping, a query was raised about plans to enhance enforcement through CCTV and AI. It was confirmed that mobile cameras were deployed in hotspots, but identification challenges remained. It was assured that robust evidence was pursued and enforcement action taken where possible.

A question was asked by the Select Committee Members about the cost-benefit analysis of opting for cleaning services to reduce contamination.
It was agreed that further information on contamination rates and mitigation measures would be provided to the Committee.

In response to Members concerns regarding the difficulty for residents to report waste-related ASB accurately, it was confirmed that a new reporting system with photo upload, geolocation, and AI classification was being introduced to improve analytics and ease of reporting.

RESOLVED: That the Select Committee:

1.    Noted the Annual Performance Report for 2024/25, as attached in Appendix 1; and

2.    Noted that the report would be presented to full Council in November alongside the Annual Performance Report.