Report - London Borough of Hillingdon

Cabinet agenda 

Meeting Date: THURSDAY 4 TH MARCH 2004 

Time: 

Venue: 

7.00 P.M. 

COMMITTEE ROOM 6, CIVIC CENTRE 

HIGH STREET, UXBRIDGE 

COUNCILLORS IN THE CABINET 

Councillor Ray Puddifoot 

Councillor David Simmonds 

Councillor Jim O’Neill 

Councillor Philip Corthorne 

Councillor Solveig Stone 

Councillor Jonathan Bianco 

Councillor Douglas Mills 

Councillor Mike Heywood 

Leader of the Council 

Deputy Leader and Member for 

Social Services and Health 

Environment 

Housing 

Education, Youth and Leisure 

Finance and Corporate Services 

Performance, Partnerships and 

Regeneration 

Planning and Transportation 

This agenda contains papers which detail the business of and decisions to be made by 

the Cabinet for the month of March. If you would like further information or copies of 

the agenda please call Hillingdon’s Cabinet Office on 01895 250472 or by visiting the 

Council’s website: 

www.hillingdon.gov.uk 

Mark Braddock - Cabinet Secretary 

Involving you in the way we do business… 

This agenda is 

Members of the Public and Press are very welcome to attend this meeting. 

Parking is available via the entrance in the High Street, Uxbridge. available Please in large 

enter from the Council’s main reception, where you will be print directed to the 

relevant Committee Room.

Cabinet Agenda – 4 th March 2004 

Agenda issued on 25 th February 2004 

1. Apologies for Absence 

2. Declarations of Interest – in matters coming before this meeting 

3. To receive the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 12 th February 

2004, copy attached (pages i – xi) 

4. To confirm that the items of business marked Part 1 will be considered 

in public and that the items marked Part 2 will be considered in private 

5. Consideration of Cabinet reports 

PART 1 – MEMBERS, PUBLIC AND PRESS 

This section lists the reports to be considered by the Cabinet in public. The 

number in brackets after each report title indicates the reference number in 

the Council’s Forward Plan, which is published monthly. 

Page 

1 Annual Audit Letter 2002/2003 1 

2 Fair Funding Arrangements 2004/2005 19 

3 Controlled Drinking Zones – Formal Designation 42 

4 Local Cultural Strategy for Hillingdon 54 

5 A review of the Animal Welfare Charter 83 

6 Hillingdon Borough Transport Strategy – Response to the 

93 

Preliminary Consultation 

7 Behaviour Support Plan 2004/2005 133 

8 Hillingdon LEA/DfES Compact 136 

9 Review of Welfare Meals Service, Meals in the Home, Dining 

150 

Centre, Day centre Meals and Civic Centre Banqueting Service 

10 Early Years Development and Childcare Partnership Implementation 152 

Plan 2004/2005 

11 Revenue Budget 2003/2004 Monthly Monitoring Report Month 9 157 

(December 2003) 

12 Opening of Private Equity Tender Off Site 174 

PART 2 – PRIVATE, MEMBERS ONLY 

The reports listed below in Part 2 are not made public because they contain 

confidential information as defined in the Local Government (Access to 

Information) Act 1985. This is because:

Items 13 and 14 deal with ‘any terms proposed or to be proposed by or to the 

Authority in the course of negotiations for a contract for the acquisition or 

disposal of property or the supply of goods or services.’ 

13 The provision of Fleet Vehicles on long and short term hire 176 

14 Voluntary Sector Leasing Policy TO FOLLOW 

6. Any business transferred from Part 1 of the agenda.

CABINET 12 TH FEBRUARY 2004 

DECISIONS SHEET PUBLISHED BY THE CABINET OFFICE 

ON 16 TH FEBRUARY 2004 

Officer contact 

1A 

PRESENT 

Members of Cabinet – Councillors Ray Puddifoot, David Simmonds, 

Jonathan Bianco, Philip Corthorne, Mike Heywood, Douglas Mills, Jim 

O’Neill, Solveig Stone. 

Other Party Leaders/Deputy Leaders – Councillors Steve Carey and Rod 

Marshall. 

Overview & Scrutiny Chairmen/Vice Chairmen – Councillor Anthony Way 

(Item 1A), Councillor Keith Burrows (Item 8). 

Members congratulated Councillor Rod Marshall on his recent marriage. 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 

Councillor Rod Marshall declared a general personal and non-prejudicial 

interest as Dean of Faculty at Buckinghamshire Chilterns University 

College, which was a provider of courses to the Council’s Social Services 

Group and as a member of the Board of Hillingdon Homes. Councillor Rod 

Marshall also declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Items 4 and 5 

and left the meeting for the discussion on those items. 

MINUTES 

The minutes of the meeting held 15 th January 2004 were agreed as 

correct. 

ALLOCATION OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE VOLUNTARY 

SECTOR 2004/2005 

DECISION 

1. That the Cabinet agrees the recommendations on the allocation of 

grants to Voluntary groups as set out in the schedule attached to the 

report, with the exception of the grant to Hillingdon Autistic Care and 

Support which is to be £25,000 and not as printed. 

2. That it is confirmed that the sum of £264,000 is to be set aside for 

grant to Hillingdon Citizens’ Advice Bureau until the Council is 

satisfied and has received the outcome of the review being 

undertaken by the National CAB. 

REASON FOR DECISION 

Nigel Cramb 

01895 

250394

To allocate money to voluntary sector organisations. 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED 

To vary the allocations or to make no decisions. 

1B THE COUNCIL’S BUDGETS 2004/2005 

The Leader advised the meeting that subject to promises made to him that 

day by the DfES being delivered, the budget shortfall was now reduced to 

£1.15m. It was noted that the Cabinet would be meeting again before the 

Council tax setting meeting on 26 th February 2004, to make 

recommendations about the budget. 

Leigh 

Whitehouse 

01895 

227457 

Thanks were recorded to the Members of Parliament for the 

Constituencies in the Borough and to the Leader of the Council for the 

negotiations they had carried out with Government Ministers about the 

funding requirement arising from the Hillingdon Judgment. 

Thanks were also recorded to officers who had supported the Leader of 

the Council in the meetings with Government Ministers, in particular Leigh 

Whitehouse and Kamini Rambellas. 

It was noted that the amount in the capital budget for Chrysalis funding had 

been increased to £900,000 and that 20% of this funding would be 

allocated for community safety items. 

DECISION 

1. To note the proposals put forward to offset the impact of the 

Hillingdon Judgment in 2004/05 

2. To note the revised growth list in Appendix B 

3. To note the proposed reductions included in Appendix C and 

authorises officers to begin work on implementation in the current 

year. 

4. To note the Capital Programme as outlined in Appendix E, 

including the internally financed schemes detailed in Appendix D 

5. To note the Prudential Indicators for 2004/05 as detailed in 

Appendix F 

6. To note the Director of Finance’s recommendations regarding his 

responsibilities under the Local Government Act 2003 

7. To note the requirement for further consultation to be undertaken 

as a result of the amendments to the draft budget proposals 

REASON FOR DECISION

To comply with the Budget and Policy Framework Rules and allow the 

presentation to the Council of a recommended budget for 2004/2005. 


To amend the proposals. 

This Item had been dispatched less than 5 clear days before the meeting. 

The Chairman agreed that it be considered as urgent because 

fundamental changes have been made to the draft budget issued for 

consultation as a result of continuing uncertainty over funding for services 

to Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children arising from the Hillingdon 

Judgment. In order to allow for consultation on the revised proposals it has 

been necessary to issue a further budget report. 

2 HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT (HRA) RENT SETTING 2004/2005 

DECISION 

1. That it is agreed to continue to use formula rents under the ODPM 

rents restructure policy to calculate HRA dwelling rents for 

2004/2005. 

Ola Ajala 

01895 

250795 

2. To approve the HRA rent, charges and allowances for 2004/2005 as 

set out in Table A of the report. 

3. To note the latest projected expenditure for 2003/2004 and 

2004/2005 in Appendix 1 to the report. Appendix 1 is estimating HRA 

uncommitted balance at the end of 2003/2004 at £2.78m and £2.13m 

for 2004/2005. 

4. That the HRA capital programme is granted exemption from the 

moratorium on capital expenditure as imposed for 2004/2005. 

REASONS FOR DECISION 

To review the levels of rent, service charges and allowances for 2004/2005 

to ensure that the HRA does not go into deficit and the cost of providing 

services is recovered from HRA service users. 


To set alternative levels charges for non dwelling services. 

3 IMPROVEMENT PLANNING : HILLINGDON’S RESPONSE TO THE CPA 

REFRESH 2003 

DECISION 

Brian Murrell 

01895

1. To note the work done in improvement planning in 2003/04 as set 

out in the report, and the positive qualitative assessment report from 

the Audit Commission. 

250612 

2. To agree the arrangements for improvement planning for 2004/5 

and beyond as set out in the report. 

3. To note the proposed changes to CPA from 2005 and instructs the 

officers to submit a proposed response to the consultation to the 

Leader of the Council and to the Cabinet Member for Performance, 

Partnerships and Regeneration. 

4. To instruct officers to arrange an independent “peer” review 

conducted by the IDeA to benchmark the Council’s progress in 

improving its corporate capacity. 

5. To instruct officers to assess all capacity building options and 

submit a report with recommendations to the Leader of the Council 

and to the Cabinet Member for Performance, Partnerships and 

Regeneration. 


The CPA process requires all Councils to carry out improvement planning 

based on their CPA result. 


To not support and resource all or some of the proposals for Improvement 

Planning. 

4 HILLINGDON ADULT EDUCATION SERVICE POST-INSPECTION 

ACTION PLAN AND 3 YEAR DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2003/2006 

DECISION 

1. To endorse the Post Inspection Action Plan (page 10 of the green 

pages) and request an updated plan to be presented to the Cabinet 

after the full autumn inspection. 

Roger 

Turner / 

Tricia Collis 

01895 

250789 / 

676690 

2. To endorse the Three Year Development Plan (page 1 of the green 

pages) and associated actions and targets, including the Options 

Appraisal (Appendix C, page 46 of the report) and request a further 

report on the Options Appraisal. It was also agreed that the third 

paragraph in Appendix C (starting ‘Whatever recommendations 

reached..’) was to be deleted. 

3. To agree use up to £25k of the EYL budget for 2003/04 and request 

an option appraisal as soon as possible. 

REASON FOR DECISION

To ensure the Authority can improve the quality of the learning 

opportunities it offers to adults and draw down funding from the LSC to 

provide learning opportunities in the most efficient and effective way. 


To modify the Action Plan and the 3 Year Development Plan. 

5 HILLINGDON ADULT EDUCATION SERVICE ACCOMMODATION 

STRATEGY 2003/2007 

DECISION 

1. To endorse in principle the Hillingdon Adult Education 

Accommodation Strategy 

2. To instruct officers to continue to develop detailed costed 

proposals for: 

the replacement of the Frays Centre in Uxbridge in partnership with 

Uxbridge College 

the redevelopment of Victoria Centre in its current location, including 

the option of including a new replacement library for Ruislip 

Manor 

the redevelopment of the North Hillingdon site in partnership with 

The Douay Martyrs school 

the provision of an adult learning facility as part of the new Ruislip 

High School 

Roger 

Turner / 

Tricia Collis 

01895 

250789 / 

676690 

3. To endorse the Capital Bid for the provision of an Adult Learning 

Centre at Hayes Manor School and a similar bid for Harefield at the 

Harefield Academy 


To enable the Authority to continue to offer high quality adult learning 

opportunities in DDA part 4 compliant buildings and to enable the 

development of learning opportunities to meet the needs of residents 

through continued funding from the LSC. 


To request additional information at a later stage on two of the buildings. 

6 POST-16 BASIC NEEDS CAPITAL ALLOCATION 

DECISION 

To endorse the decision to allocate capital funding to Mellow Lane 

and Vyners Secondary Schools in order for the two schools to 

Roger 

Turner 

01895

expand their sixth form accommodation. 

250789 


Cabinet approval is required to the level of expenditure for the two 

projects. 


To withdraw funding for the projects. 

7 JOINT ALLOTMENTS STRATEGY 

DECISION 

1. To note the investment made to date in site improvements and 

endorses the proposed programme of works for 2004/05 and beyond. 

2. To declare Site A (shown hatched black on plan G.1075/A) surplus 

to requirements 

3. To agree to the rationalisation of Site B and, subject to negotiation 

with the allotment holders and the grant of Secretary of State’s 

consent to its release from allotment use, declares the part hatched 

black on the plan G.1075/B surplus to requirements 

Stuart 

Hunt/Jackie 

Hodgson 

01895 

250916 / 

250932 

4. To instruct the Head of Property Services to: 

(i) give twelve months notice to the plotholders on the surplus 

sites; 

(ii) prepare development proposals for each site and, with the 

approval of the Cabinet Member for Finance and Property 

Services make outline planning applications 

(iii) market the sites and seek informal bids for report back to 

Cabinet 

5. To allocate 10% of the capital receipt up to a maximum of £800,000 

over the four years 04/05 to 08/09 from the proceeds arising from the 

sale of Site A and Site B for reinvestment in the remaining allotment 

sites. 

6. That the release of the monies allocated for reinvestment in the 

allotment sites be subject to approval by the relevant Cabinet 

Member of detailed programmes of works within the overall 

framework of the Allotment Strategy. 


To set priorities for investing in allotments from fundraising and 

rationalisation of allotment land that is surplus. 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

To not dispose of the sites or not to invest resources in other allotments. 

8 CHOICE BASED LETTINGS - LOCATA 

DECISION 

1. To agree the continuation of Hillingdon's membership of Locata 

and the Choice Based lettings scheme for a further 12 months, when 

it will be reviewed again by Cabinet. 

Ann Lander 

01895 

250717 

2. To confirm the continuation of the current assessment criteria 

adopted on 4 th December 2001 as part of the pilot. The criteria is 

attached at Appendix 1. 

3. To agree that in conjunction with other Locata partners’, officers 

continue to develop and improve the scheme as outlined in the 

enhancements plan attached at Appendix 2. 

4. To note with reservations the attempt of the Notting Hill Housing 

Group to join the Locata partnership and instructs officers to oppose 

their inclusion until such time as there is a clear and demonstrable 

improvement in their standard of estate management. 


Choice based lettings has been successfully introduced in Hillingdon and 

has increased options for residents to find housing. Continuing in 

membership of LOCATA will deliver choice to applicants and tenants in the 

social housing sector. 


To withdraw from choice based lettings. To enter into an alternative 

partnership to offer choice based lettings. To return to the previous means 

of allocation and assessment scheme. 

9 REVENUE BUDGET 2003/2004 MONTHLY MONITORING REPORT 

MONTH 8 (NOVEMBER 2003) 

DECISION 

To note the improved position of the revenue budget and agrees to 

officers continuing to take appropriate actions to ensure the 

budgeted revenue surplus for the current year is achieved. 

Paul 

Whaymand 

01895 

556074 


To achieve the Council’s expected surplus in line with the approved 

budget.


None. 

10 USE OF CONTINGENCY FUNDING FOR HARLINGTON ROAD DEPOT 

SITE INVESTIGATIONS 

DECISION 

To authorise the release of £24,000 of contingency in 2003/4 to fund 

the site investigation work authorised by officers. 

Pacey 

Cheales 

01895 

250118 


To enable progress on site investigation work at Harlington Road Depot to 

begin as a matter of urgency. 


None. 

11 COUNCIL OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED THIRD RUNWAY AT 

HEATHROW - CONSIDERATION OF THE AVIATION WHITE PAPER 

AND PROPOSED ACTIONS 

DECISION 

1. On the basis of the legal advice which has been obtained 

from Leading Counsel, Cabinet instructs the Borough Solicitor to 

write to the Government for the purpose of seeking clarification on 

the Northolt issue and depending on the Government's response, to 

take such action as is deemed necessary and appropriate. 

Raj Alagh / 

Brian Murrell 

/ Tim Jurdon 

01895 

250617/ 

250612 / 

250610 

2. The Cabinet agrees that the Council should join in a legal 

action commenced by a consortium of local authorities led by the 

London Borough of Wandsworth. 

3. That future options for the campaign against the third 

runway, including the use of consultants, lobbyists, and support for 

NOTRAG be deferred for consideration following any resolution in 

respect of the legal challenge. 

4. That consideration of detailed impacts of the possible third 

runway, relating to any information received from BAA or details of 

any blight scheme received, be referred to a future meeting of the 

Cabinet. 


The Council has limited time to decide on whether it will legally challenge 

any aspects of the Aviation White Paper. There is also a need to review 

the current arrangements for public relations, parliamentary lobbying, and

support for NOTRAG following publication of the White Paper, and this is 

considered best done in consultation with wider campaign stakeholders. 


To not challenge the White Paper and to end the campaign against the 

third runway. 

The report was considered in Part 2 because it contained confidential 

information as defined in paragraph 12 of the Schedule to the Local 

Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, namely ‘Any instructions to 

counsel and any opinion of counsel whether or not in connection with any 

proceedings and any advice received, information obtained or action to be 

taken in connection with any legal proceedings by or against the authority 

or the determination of any matter affecting the authority whether, in either 

case, proceedings have been commenced or are in contemplation. 

12 APPOINTMENT OF CORPORATE ADVERTISING SERVICES 

SUPPLIER TO THE LONDON BOROUGH OF HILLINGDON AND THE 

LCSG 

DECISION 

To award the contract for the supply of all advertising and Public 

Notice services to TMP Worldwide Ltd. 

Danesh 

Sharma 

01895 

277934 


The contract offers best value to the council and will result in cost savings. 


To retender the contract. 



Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, namely ‘any terms 

proposed or to be proposed by or to the Authority in the course of 

negotiations for a contract for the acquisition or disposal of property or the 

supply of goods or services. 

13 APPOINTMENT OF CONSULTANT TO DELIVER HRA DEVELOPMENT 

PROGRAMME AND OTHER MAJOR PROJECTS 

DECISION 

To appoint Redloft Partnership for a 2 year period from February 

2004. 

Ann Lander 

01895 

250717 


The appointment offers the most effective way of delivering the HRA

Programme. 


To not appoint Redloft Partnership. 







14 PROPOSED GRANT OF LEASES OF PROPERTIES FOR MORE THAN 

SEVEN YEARS 

DECISION 

That Cabinet authorises grant of leases for a term exceeding seven 

years in respect of the two properties identified in the report upon 

terms to be agreed by the Head of Property Services. 

Martin White 

01895 

250936 


To allow the Council to receive increased rental income. 


To not proceed with the leases. 







15 APPROVAL TO ACCEPT A NEGOTIATED TENDER FOR THE SURVEY 

OF CORPORATE STOCK SITES AND BUILDINGS FOR DISABILITY 

DISCRIMINATION ACT REQUIREMENTS - PHASE THREE SURVEYS 

DECISION 

To accept the negotiated tender from Vectra Property Consulting in 

the sum of £68,934.77 to undertake Phase 3 access surveys to sites. 

Gerry 

Edwards 

01895 

250903 


To enable surveys to be progressed.


To retender the contract. 







The meeting closed at 9.17 p.m. 

THESE DECISIONS WILL COME INTO FORCE AND WILL THEN BE IMPLEMENTED UNLESS 

THEY ARE CALLED-IN. THE DEADLINE FOR CALL-IN TO BE RECEIVED BY THE HEAD OF 

DEMOCRATIC SERVICES IS 5PM ON MONDAY 23 RD FEBRUARY 2004. 

COUNCILLORS AND OFFICERS WILL BE NOTIFIED OF ANY CALL-INS RECEIVED. 

This is a summary of the Cabinet’s decisions. 

If you wish for more detailed information on any of the decisions please contact Hillingdon’s Cabinet 

Office - Mark Braddock on 01895 250470 or Susan Came on 01895 250472. 

The right hand column indicates the name of the officer(s) responsible for implementing/following up 

the decision in each case. Circulation of this decisions sheet is to Members of the Council, Corporate 

Directors, Group Secretariats.

ANNUAL AUDIT LETTER 2002/3 ITEM 1 

SUMMARY 

Contact Officer: P Whaymand 

Telephone: 01895 556074 

This report summarises the main points raised in the District Auditor’s letter on 

2002/3 audit and inspection issues. The District Auditor has been invited to present 

his Letter to the Cabinet and to answer Members’ questions. The letter notes the first 

unqualified accounts since 1996/7, the unqualified Best Value Performance Plan, the 

generally sound internal controls and the promising improvements shown on 

inspections. It also notes the good record in financial management, the need for 

reserves to be higher as currently planned, the improvement in the use of resources 

CPA rating from 2 to 3 out of 4, and the plan to improve the Council’s overall CPA 

rating. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

1. That the annual Audit Letter attached be noted. 

2. That staff be commended for achieving the improvements noted by the 

District Auditor. 

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION 

The Cabinet is required to consider the annual audit letter. 

OPTIONS 

Not relevant. 

COMMENTS OF OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 

The Corporate Services Overview & Scrutiny Committee will be commenting on this 

report at its meeting in March 2004. 

INFORMATION 

1. This is the second joint audit and inspection Annual Letter for members. The 

Letter summarises the conclusions and significant issues arising from the 2002/2003 

audit and inspection programme and comments on other current issues. 

2. The key messages in the Annual Letter (a full copy of which is attached) are as 

follows: 

PART I – MEMBERS & PUBLIC (INCLUDING THE PRESS) 

Cabinet Reports - 4 th March 2003 Page 1

Audit Assurance Work 

3. An unqualified opinion on the Council’s 2002/2003 accounts and Pension Fund 

was issued in December 2003. This is the first time since 1996/97 that the Council 

has received an unqualified opinion on its accounts. The Council’s draft accounts 

were prepared for audit by August 2003 and supporting documentation was once 

again of a good standard. The letter goes on to note that the Council is well placed to 

tackle the challenge of the earlier audit opinions that will be required in future years. 

4. The Council also received an unqualified opinion on the 2003/2004 Best Value 

Performance Plan. 

5. In relation to grant claims the letter says that overall, the audit of the Council’s 

grant claims for 2001/2002 was successful. Claims were generally well prepared for 

audit, accurate, and the audits conducted efficiently. However, there are still some 

claims where the supporting documentation can be improved. The Director of 

Finance is taking steps to ensure that the preparation of these claims is improved by 

increasing the central review of the claims. 

Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance 

6. The letter comments that in recent years, the Council has developed a good track 

record in financial management, exercised restraints where needed, and begun to 

build its reserves. 

7. However the letter also comments that the reserves are still too low to provide 

protection against unforeseen cost pressures. The financial forecast for 2003/4 

provides for further improvement on this, as does the longer term financial plan. 

8. The letter comments that the Council’s arrangements for maintaining internal 

financial control, for ensuring standards of financial conduct and the prevention of 

fraud and corruption, and for maintaining the legality of financial transactions are 

generally sound. 

Inspections 

9. The Audit letter comments that inspections undertaken on Housing Management 

and ICT Service during 2003 show promising improvement prospects. 

10. The Housing Management Service was found to have clear aims, good access, 

an effective complaints system, good caretaking and cleaning services and 

improving rent collection procedures. 

11. The ICT service had promising prospects for improvement because: 

• Senior officer, members and ICT staff are leading the e-government agenda; 

• There is a good track record of partnership working to deliver e-government 

plans; 

• Additional funding has been committed to ICT developments. 



CPA Scorecard 

12. The Letter comments that the Council has generally maintained its services at 

the level of the previous year. Both Housing and Education Services have 

maintained their good status. The use of resources rating has improved from 2 to 3 

which reflects improvement in financial and management processes. The only area 

of deterioration was in social care for children, but this had a significant impact on 

the Council’s overall performance rating, dropping it from ‘fair’ to ‘weak’. Report also 

comments that Waste recycling, services for the under-fives and careers’ guidance 

to teenagers have improved and that the Planning service is making progress. 

13. The letter also comments that the Council has put in place plans to improve our 

rating and that these plans will be monitored over the next 12 months. Cabinet at its 

meeting of 12 February agreed revised arrangements for improvement planning for 

2004/5 and beyond, operating as part of the Hillingdon Improvement Programme. 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 

14. There are no direct financial implications flowing from the report. The 

improvements planned to address some of the issues raised in the letter have been 

built into the service planning process for 2004/5. The letter refers to the cost of the 

external audit service for the 2002/3 audit being £673k. 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS 

15. There are no specific legal implications arising from this report. 

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS 

2002/3 Annual Letter from District Auditor 

































FAIR FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS 2004/05 ITEM 2 

SUMMARY 

Contact Officer: David Tully 

Telephone: 01895 250076 

Officers have worked with schools over the last few months to establish the most 

appropriate way of distributing the Schools Budget for 2004/05, including the 

operation of the Fair Funding formula. Two rounds of consultation have taken place 

and the proposals put forward in the second consultation form the basis of the 

recommendations in this report. Schools are due to articulate their collective view on 

the proposals at Schools Forum on 3 rd March 2004, so a summary of their 

recommendations will be provided to Cabinet before it is asked to make final 

decisions. 

The recommendations ask that the full extent of any uncommitted funds within the 

Schools Budget for 2004/05 are allocated to primary schools to address funding 

differentials which have developed between Hillingdon primary schools and primary 

schools in other Outer London Boroughs. 

The other recommendations largely propose modifications to the distribution of 

funding in the Fair Funding formula. 


That Members: 

a) Agree to distribute to primary schools the whole of any uncommitted 

funding that is available within the Schools Budget (ie any amounts 

beyond the Minimum Funding Guarantee and any commitments for SEN 

and other budgets) 

b) Agree to seek formal permission from the DfES to omit three factors from 

the calculations of the Minimum Funding Guarantee for schools: SEN 

proxy, Specialist Resourced Provision and Closing Schools. 

c) Agree to an Increased weighting for social deprivation and turnover 

factors, as set out in the consultation paper (No 2) proposals: 

d) Agree the use of Key Stage 1 data instead of baseline data for Foundation 

and Key Stage 1 pupils for Non-Statemented SEN funding and for high 

incidence SEN proxy funding and for the weightings to be calculated as 

set out in the consultation paper (No 2). 

e) Agree to introduce a minimum protection factor for primary, secondary 

and special schools. 



f) Agree to introduce a closing schools factor to allow for the arrangements 

associated with the closure of Evelyns Community School, as set out in 

the consultation paper (No 2). 

g) Agree to introduce a formal delegated budget for McMillan Nursery, as a 

maintained nursery school and for that budget to be composed of three 

factors: place factors, a nursery factor and a nursery school factor. 

h) Take up the whole of the Advanced Skills Teachers (AST) Standards Fund 

grant on the basis that each school with an AST makes a voluntary 

contribution to create the matched funding. 

i) Retain certain elements of the School Development Grant as set out in the 

consultation paper (No 2). 

j) Allocate any excess School Development Grant beyond the minimum 

entitlement for each school on the basis of PLASC January 2004 pupil 

numbers. 

REASONS FOR OFFICER RECOMMENDATION 

The Council, as Local Education Authority, is required to consider changes annually 

to its Fair Funding scheme, to consult on any changes with schools and with the 

Schools Forum, and to take account of their views before final decisions. Any 

changes should be implemented in time for budgets to be published on or before 

31 st March 2004. 

The recommendations are put forward as the proposals which officers believed were 

appropriate after the first round of Fair Funding consultation with schools; 

recommendations may be revised, subject to the outcomes of the second round of 

consultation. 

OPTIONS AVAILABLE 

To accept the recommendations. 

To propose amendments to the recommendations. 

To accept alternative recommendations which might be proposed either by officers 

or by Schools Forum after the Schools Forum meeting on 3 rd March 2004. 

COMMENTS OF OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 

Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the contents of the first consultation 

paper on Fair Funding at its meeting on 8 th January 2004. 



INFORMATION 

1. The Fair Funding Consultation Paper (No2) is in Appendix 1 and it explains all of 

the proposals being considered by schools. The outcomes from the consultation 

paper are being considered by Schools Forum on 3 rd March 2004 and their views will 

be conveyed to Cabinet prior to final decisions being made. 

2. One important element within the proposals is that any uncommitted funding 

within the Schools Budget be allocated to primary schools. Officers have made this 

recommendation on the basis of the resolution made by Schools Forum at its 

meeting on 22 nd January 2004 that funding for each sector move to the level of the 

Outer London Borough average. Moreover, the evidence on which the Schools 

Forum made their resolution has also heavily influenced the officer recommendation. 

3. There are three pieces of evidence now available that support the view that any 

uncommitted funding be allocated in 2004/05 to primary schools: 

a) The comparison of primary, secondary and special needs budgets for 2003/04 

with the component sub-blocks of the Education Formula Spending Share 

indicate that primary schools are being funded £4.6m below the level of the 

FSS. There has not been such a large movement in the FSS for 2004/05 to 

suggest that this pattern is not still valid. In the first consultation paper on Fair 

Funding issued in December 2004, the analysis was as follows: 

Table 4: Analysis of Education FSS Sub-blocks 

Nursery & 

Secondary Special Total 

Primary 

Total Schools budget on 

a basis comparable to the 

FSS for Schools 

58,157,035 49,084,536 14,485,861 121,727,431 

FSS for schools 62,715,003 48,383,678 12,790,662 123,889,343 

Difference between 

budget and FSS 

-4,557,968 700,858 1,695,199 -2,161,912 

Officers explored the methodology for this analysis with the DfES to ensure that 

a like-for-like comparison was being made. 

b) At the 9 th December 2003 meeting of the Schools Forum a paper was 

considered which analysed the ratio of primary – secondary relative funding. It 

used publicly available statistics, using budgets and actuals. It concluded that, 

compared to other Outer London Boroughs Hillingdon primary pupils were being 

funded at an average ratio of 67.4% of the value of secondary pupil, whereas 

the Outer London ratio was 75.35%. This did not imply that secondary pupils 

were overfunded, rather that primary schools were being funded consistently 

below the average. Schools Forum has asked for some independent 

verification of the validity of the analysis and conclusions and officers are 

arranging for this to happen. There does not, however, appear to be any 

obvious flaw in the analysis and it does reinforce the conclusions about the 



elatively worse funding for primary schools identified in the FSS analysis 

above. 

c) The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy has issued draft 

statistics on detailed 2003/04 budgets for schools. This provides the basis on 

which the Schools Forum resolution can be considered. 

The average Individual Schools Budget (ISB) Share per primary pupil in Outer 

London for 2003/04 was £2,552, compared to the amount per Hillingdon primary 

pupil of £2,395. To fund Hillingdon primary pupils at that average level would 

require an additional £3.6m. Hillingdon primary schools were ranked 16 th out of 

20 in the amount of ISB per pupil. 

The average Individual Schools Budget Share per secondary pupil in Outer 

London for 2003/04 was £3,363, compared to the amount per Hillingdon primary 

pupil of £3,441. Hillingdon secondary schools were ranked 7 th out of 20 in the 

amount of ISB per pupil. 

These figures demonstrate that, to reach the Outer London Borough average, 

additional funding needs to be found for primary, but not secondary schools. 

This situation would be reviewed again in 2004/05 for future years. 

CORPORATE CONSULTATIONS CARRIED OUT 

Resource Implications 

4. The report deals with how the available funding should be distributed. Decisions 

about the level of funding for schools will be taken at Council on 26 th February 2004. 

The financial aspects of the School Forum resolution to fund at the level of the Outer 

London Borough average are explained in the text. 

Legal implications 

5. There are no legal implications arising directly from this report. 

Property implications 

6. There are no property implications arising directly from this report. 

EXTERNAL CONSULTATIONS CARRIED OUT 

7. Schools and the Schools Forum have been formally consulted and their views will 

be reported to Cabinet prior to any final decision being taken. 


1 st Fair Funding Consultation – December 2003 and the outcomes. 

Schools Forum minutes December 2003 and January 2004 

Cabinet reports on the Council’s budget – December 2003 and February 2004 



Education, Youth and Leisure Services 

Consultation Paper (No 2) – February 2004 

Fair Funding Arrangements 2004/05. 

Target audience: 

Deadlines 

response: 

for 

Headteachers 

Governing Bodies 

Senior Managers 

Finance Officers 

Teachers Professional Associations 

Wednesday 25 th February 2004 (to allow 

consideration of responses at Schools Forum on 

3 rd March 2004) 

Queries on this consultation paper should be directed to: 

David Tully 

Assistant Director: Finance & 

Resources 

Tel: 01895 250076 

Fax: 01895 250831 

Email: dtully@hillingdon.gov.uk 

School Finance Team 

Jane Rana 

Tel: 01895 250432 

Geoff Trott 

Tel: 01895 250458 

Colin Osafo 

Tel: 01895 250451 

Martyn Callister 

Principal Accountant: Schools 

Tel: 01895 277687 

Fax: 01895 277007 

Email: Mcallister@hillingdon.gov.uk 

Special Needs Team 

Linda Jackson 

Tel: 01895 250489 

Email: Ljackson2@hillingdon.gov.uk 

Formal responses should be sent to: 

Janet Watson 

EYL Directorate 

4E.01 Civic Centre 

Uxbridge 

Middlesex UB8 1QU 

Tel: 01895 277970 

Fax: 01895 250831 

Email: jwatson2@hillingdon.gov.uk 

By Noon Wednesday 25 th February 2004 



Consultation Paper (No 2) – February 2004 

Fair Funding Arrangements 2004/05 

Contents 

Item Description Page 

1 Introduction 3 

2 Consultation issues 3 

3 Feedback from Consultation (No 1) 4 

4 Overall Financial Position 4 

5 Minimum Funding Guarantee 8 

6 Formula Factors 9 

7 Standards Fund – Take-up of grants 13 

8 Standards Fund – Distributional issues 14 

9 Data in the Draft Budgets 14 

10 Timetable 15 

Appendix 1 Outcomes from the Schools Forum’s consideration of 16 

Consultation Paper (No 1) and officer comment. 

Appendix 2 Composition of the Schools Budget 2003/04 19 

Annexes on School Draft budgets are circulated separately. 



1. Introduction 

1.1 This is the second of two consultation rounds on the Fair Funding 

arrangements for 2004/05. In the first round, Schools Forum considered the 7 

questions posed by the LEA on the arrangements for 2004/05. This second 

consultation paper draws on the outcomes of the first to make firm proposals 

for Fair Funding for 2004/05. It also provides an update on the overall 

financial position. Annexes to this paper with draft budget information are 

being circulated to schools separately. 

2. Consultation issues 

2.1 The LEA is consulting the Schools Forum and individual schools on 

the following matters: 

a) Distribution of funding. Officers propose to recommend to Cabinet 

to distribute to primary schools the whole of any uncommitted 

funding that is available within the Schools Budget (ie any amounts 

beyond the Minimum Funding Guarantee and any commitments for 

SEN and other budgets) 

b) The operation of the Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) for 

2004/05. In particular, proposals to omit three factors from the 

calculations: SEN proxy, Specialist Resourced Provision and 

Closing Schools. 

c) Changes to the Fair Funding Formula for 2004/05. The following is a 

list of the proposed or possible changes for 2004/05: 

Primary 

• Increased weighting for social deprivation and turnover 

factors: 

• The use of Key Stage 1 data instead of baseline data for 

Foundation and Key Stage 1 pupils for Non-Statemented 

SEN funding and some changes to weightings. 

• Revisions to the proxy factor for high incidence SEN, 

• Introduction of a factor providing minimum protection 

for primary schools. 

Secondary 

• The introduction of a closing schools factor to allow for 

the arrangements associated with the closure of Evelyns 

Community School. 

• The introduction of a minimum level of funding through 

the proxy factor for high incidence SEN, 


for secondary schools. 



Special 


for special schools. 

Nursery 

• Introduction of a formal delegated budget for McMillan 

Nursery, as a maintained nursery school. 

• The introduction of a place factor, nursery factor and 

nursery school factor for the first year as the basis of 

allocating that delegated budget. 

d) Standards Fund take-up. The whole of the Advanced Skills Teachers 

grant is to be taken up on the basis that each school with an AST 

makes a voluntary contribution to create the matched funding. Also, 

within the School Development Grant the LEA proposes to retain 

certain elements as agreed by Schools Forum. 

e) Standards Fund distribution mechanisms. For the School 

Development Grant to allocate any excess beyond the minimum 

entitlement for each school on the basis of PLASC January 2004 

pupil numbers. 

f) Data used in the formula. Each school is asked to consider the data 

used in the formula and advise the School Finance Team of 

instances where errors or omissions appear to have occurred. 

3. Feedback from Consultation (No 1). 

3.1 The Schools Forum considered the responses to the consultation paper 

and their views (as recorded in the draft minutes) are set out in Appendix 1. 

The rest of this paper sets out information regarding an updated position. 

4. Overall financial position 

4.1 The analysis in the December 2003 consultation paper identified that 

there was estimated to be £1.2m of unearmarked funding available within a 

passported Schools Budget for 2004/05. A number of items have changed in 

the preparation of detailed budgets (eg the calculation of minimum budgets 

using PLASC data for 2004 and some of the provisions for special needs 

budgets, in particular, have proven to be too prudent (ie we set aside too 

much). The amount of unearmarked funding available within a passported 

Schools Budget for 2004/05 is now in the region of £2.9m. 

4.2 Nonetheless, the Council is facing difficult choices in setting the overall 

budget for 2004/05 and it is still far from certain whether Members will be able 

to afford any growth beyond the minimum passporting requirement. Indeed, 

in some scenarios it might prove difficult for Members to even meet the 

passporting requirement. Before any final decisions are taken the Cabinet are 

due to issue a revised consultation on the Council’s budget at its meeting on 



Thursday 12 th February 2004. Schools Forum has already made it clear what 

its views are on the level of school budgets, but Forum may wish to comment 

further. The Cabinet will meet again on Thursday 26 th February 2004 to 

recommend a budget to the full Council, which will meet later that evening to 

make final decisions. 

4.3 Budgets for schools overall will be considered at Cabinet on 4 th March 

2004, where the final arrangements for Fair Funding for 2004/05 and the 

allocation of the available funding for distribution will be agreed. 

4.4 The latest calculation of the amount to be passported for 2004/05 is set 

out in Table 1. 

Table 1: Calculation of passporting total 2004/05 

Schools Budget 2003/04, as per Section 52 

Statement Table 1 line 1.7 

£136.079m 

The increase in the FSS for schools 

+£8.431m 

The increase in the Excellence in Cities grant 

+£0.059m 

The increase in LSC grant for Post 16 

+£1.230m 

Target total to meet passporting requirement 

2004/05 £145.799m 

4.5 The detailed review of commitments and the preparation of detailed draft 

budgets has identified some changes to the overall financial position. To 

provide a passported budget, the Schools Budget is currently estimated to 

have £2.896m uncommitted (as set out in Table 2). This figure will fluctuate if 

the data changes within the draft schools budgets (eg any changes in pupil 

numbers will directly impact on the Minimum Funding Guarantee) 

Table 2: Consideration of commitments for 2004/05 

Devolved Retained Total 

2003/04 Section 52 125,454,541 10,624,459 136,079,000 

Minimum 4% budget increases and natural 

inflation on retained budgets 5,210,309 273,513 5,483,822 

Increases in LSC funding 1,139,649 90,205 1,229,854 

Changes to SEN (estimated) 0 (35,217) (35,217) 

Changes to Standards Funds (145,859) 0 (145,859) 

Final tranche of funding for 3 Year Olds 70,000 70,000 

EiC increase 59,000 0 59,000 

Budget pressure in Early Years Centres 173,000 173,000 

Windfall arising from Evelyns City Academy 500,000 500,000 

Remainder to schools 2,386,253 2,386,253 

Total 2004/05 (current DfES control total) 134,603,894 11,195,960 145,799,854 

4.6 The first consultation paper asked whether it was appropriate for the LEA 

to increase the retained element of the Schools Budget by more than the 

devolved element of the Schools Budget. The clear answer from schools was 

no. Some of the figures have changed, in particular the detailed estimates for 

SEN and for Early Years. The calculation in Table 3 identifies that the 

increase in retained budgets would be less than that for devolved budgets. 



Given that increases attributable to matched funding for the Standards Fund 

and Early Years do not count against the excess, it does not appear that this 

is now a problem. Appendix 2 identifies what the components of the retained 

element of the Schools Budget are. 

Table 3: Calculation of devolved v retained budget increases. 

Devolved Retained Total 

Budgets 2003/04 125,454,541 10,624,459 136,079,000 

less LSC devolved funding -11,575,000 -1,293,000 (12,868,000) 

Less DfES adjustment for new City 

Academy -947,678 0 (947,678) 

Revised budget 2003/04 112,931,863 9,331,459 122,263,322 

Forecast budgets 2004/05 134,603,894 11,195,960 145,799,854 

less LSC devolved funding (12,714,469) (1,383,205) (14,097,674) 

Revised forecast budget 2004/05 121,889,425 9,812,755 131,702,180 

Increase 7.93% 5.16% 7.72% 

4.7 Levels of funding for sectors have not been determined, as final decisions 

are yet to be made. Draft budgets are set out in the annexes relevant to 

individual sectors. The introduction of the Minimum Funding Guarantee 

overrides the formula in most cases where levels of funding overall are below, 

at or just above the overall level of the MFG. As funding increases, fewer 

schools are funded by the MFG and more by the formula. This of course 

means that, for some schools, additional funding might not produce any 

additional funding for their school and this ought to be borne in mind 

when setting budgets. 

4.8 The Schools Forum at it meeting on 22 nd January 2004 advised Cabinet 

that the per pupil funding position for each sector for 2004/05 should be at the 

Outer London mean and that for future years Cabinet should increase beyond 

that to reflect the higher costs in Hillingdon schools. Primary schools are at 

the lower end of the Outer London mean, whereas secondary schools are 

broadly at the Outer London mean. The implication of the Schools Forum 

resolution is that any funding that is available for 2004/05 should be 

allocated to primary schools. Officers intend to recommend to Cabinet 

that this happen. 

4.9 So, for primary schools, indicative levels of funding have been given in 

increments of £0.5m up to £2.5m beyond the MFG level to assist schools in 

understanding how their budget is likely to be affected by different levels of 

increase to the primary sector. 

4.10 Funding for special educational needs in mainstream schools is 

critically important and further work has been done to establish the 

appropriate level of support required for 2004/05. Table 4 sets out what the 

original assumptions were for assessing the appropriate level of funding for 

the proxy factor for 2003/04. 



Table 4: Funding levels for proxy high incidence SEN factor 2003/04 

Original 2003/04 Primary Secondary Total 

New statements 280,000 70,000 350,000 

Year 7s (7/12ths) 105,000 105,000 

280,000 175,000 455,000 

4.11 In reviewing the requirements for 2004/05, officers considered the 

average number of new high incidence statements agreed in the three years 

prior to 1 st April 2003. Account was taken of: 

• the proportion of statements which previously would have been 

regarded as high incidence, but for 2004/05 will be included in the low 

incidence category. 

• the average value of a high incidence statement, based on the funding 

for those statements which continue to be funded on a per pupil basis; 

and 

• the actual Year 6 pupils moving to Year 7 in a mainstream school (not 

SRP) for both September 2003 and September 2004. 

4.12 Table 5 sets out the calculations for 2004/05. Within these totals, there 

are half a dozen or so pupils in Year 6, moving to Year 7 in September 2004 

and in the current Year 7, where their “high incidence” statement would qualify 

as low incidence under the statementing criteria for 2004/05. Individual 

schools will be consulted on the appropriateness of this for the individual 

pupils. When these details are finalised the funding for the proxy factor will be 

reduced and the amount for the individual statemented pupil funding for low 

incidence statements will be increased. 

Table 5: Calculation of funding needed for high incidence SEN proxy 2004/05 

New 2004/05 Primary Secondary Total 

Full-year effect of 2003/04 new statements 578,269 111,923 690,192 

Provision for new statements 2004/05 289,135 55,962 345,096 

Full-year effect of 2003/04 Year 7s 200,000 200,000 

Provision for new Year 7s (7/12ths) 130,000 130,000 

Uprated to 2004/05 prices (+4%) 34,696 19,915 54,612 

902,100 517,800 1,419,900 

4.13 Within the Schools Budget the funding for high and low incidence SEN 

and statemented pupils is summarised in Table 6. Funding for special needs 

continues to increase significantly faster than the rate of inflation. What Table 

6 demonstrates is that there are more resources available to all schools to 

deal with special needs. It is hoped that these significant increases will allay 

some of the fears that many heads had about the pattern of funding for the 

proxy SEN factor in particular. Moreover, officers would hope that schools 

can use their resource for the needs in their own schools, as well as perhaps 

in clusters or in learning partnerships, if the levels of funding are considered to 

be worth pooling. 



Table 6: Comparison of schools SEN funding 2003/04 v 2004/05 

Component 

Section 52 

2003/04 

Draft 

2004/05 Difference 

High incidence protected per pupil 2,346,242 1,952,069 -394,173 

High incidence proxy SEN 455,000 1,419,900 964,900 

Low incidence SEN 1,262,758 1,567,666 304,908 

Specialist Resourced Provision 1,029,966 1,411,747 381,781 

Special Schools 6,304,268 6,556,888 252,620 

TOTAL 11,398,234 12,908,270 1,510,036 

5. Minimum Funding Guarantee 

5.1 The minimum funding guarantee includes the Section 52 budget for 

2003/04 for each school, including any Additional Budget Support Grant for 

2003/04 (of which there was none for Hillingdon in 2003/04) and excludes: 

• class size funding 

• rates funding 

• prior year adjustments 

• funding with respect to individual named pupils (eg high incidence 

protected or low incidence per pupil funding) 

• newly qualified teachers funding. 

5.2 LEAs may apply to the DfES for permission to exclude other factors from 

the calculation where the inclusion of them might cause difficulties locally. 

Officers have identified three areas where it is believed that it would be more 

practical to exclude them, than leave them in the calculations for the Minimum 

Funding Guarantee. These are: 

• Proxy SEN factor for pupils with high incidence SEN; 

• Factors used to distribute funding for Specialist Resourced Provision; 

and 

• Funding for the proposed new factor for “Closing Schools” in the 

secondary sector (which is only proposed for one year to take account 

of the arrangements for the closure of Evelyns Community School). 

5.3 If the two special needs elements above were included in the MFG 

calculations, any increase in these would be netted off against any reductions 

elsewhere in the formula and the school would stand a chance of not seeing 

any benefit of the additional SEN resource. Excluding the funding from the 

MFG avoids this circumstance arising. 

5.4 For the third item on closing schools, schools will recall that this is a 

proposed new factor to take account of the large deficit which falls to the LEA 

when Evelyns closes at the end of August 2004 and Stockley Academy 

opens. The funding is available for this in the one-off windfall arising with the 

FSS for 2004/05, which will also allow £0.5m of additional growth for other 

schools that otherwise would not exist. Nonetheless, the technicalities of 



dealing with the deficit are such that it is more practical to have it as a formula 

factor for one year, rather than retain the funding in an expanded contingency 

fund. To include it in the MFG calculations would not be comparing like-withlike. 

Given that it is a one-off adjustment, it seems more straightforward to 

keep it outside the MFG calculations. 

6. Formula Factors 

Primary 

6.1 The LEA proposes to make four changes to the arrangements for the 

primary formula for 2004/05. 

a) Increased weighting for social deprivation factor. Consistent with 

proposals set out in consultation for 2003/04, the LEA proposes to 

continue to increase the amount of funding distributed through the 

social deprivation factor by 1% a year to reach the proportion of the 

FSS for Primary which is distributed on Additional Educational Needs 

indices (8.4% for 2004/05). For 2003/04 6.4% of the net budget for 

primary schools (ie excluding statemented pupil funding and 

Standards Fund grants) was distributed on social deprivation indices. 

The MFG distorts the amount being distributed on social deprivation 

and other factors, if the level of funding overall is less than, at or (for 

some schools) moderately more than the level of the MFG. 

Nonetheless, the weightings for the social deprivation factor will be 

increased by 61% (all other things being equal, this would increase the 

2003/04 allocations from £0.676m to £1.088m) and the weightings for 

the turnover factor will be increased by 100% (all other things being 

equal, this would increase the 2003/04 allocations from £0.150m to 

£0.300m). 

b) Replacement of baseline data for Foundation and Key Stage 1 pupils 

for Non-Statemented SEN funding with the use of the last four year’s 

Key Stage 1 data where pupils have not attained level 2c in Reading. 

The weightings for Foundation / Key Stage 1 to be 0.83, compared to 

1.0 for Key Stage 2 pupils. 

The methodology for 2004/05 will be: 



Table 7: Basis of distributing Non-Statemented SEN funding 2004/05 

Nursery, Data source: Key stage 1 Reading test data. 

Reception, Calculation: number of pupils not achieving 2C or below in the last 

Years 1 and 2 four years. 

Weighting: 0.83 (ie the sum of Nursery (0.5), Reception (0.83), 

Year 1 (1.0) and Year 2 (1.0), divided by 4) 

Years 3 to 6 Data source: Key stage 1 Reading test data 

Calculation: number of current pupils not achieving 2C or below 

Weighting: 1.0 (ie the sum of Year 3 (1.0), Year 4 (1.0), Year 5 

(1.0) and Year 6 (1.0), divided by 4) 

Discussions with primary colleagues led to a debate about the most 

appropriate set of KS1 data to use for the SEN factors. There was 

some debate about whether KS1 Writing, Reading or Maths should be 

used. The proposals all use Reading, which is similar to the 

arrangements for secondary schools, which use an NFER reading test. 

c) Revision to the proxy factor for high incidence SEN, such that 90% 

of the funding be distributed on the same Key Stage 1 data as in the 

Non-Statemented SEN factor above, but that Nursery, Reception and 

Year 1 pupils be given a supplementary weighting of 1.5, to mirror the 

arrangements in the per pupil allocations for pupils with statements. 

Table 8: Basis of distributing Proxy High Incidence SEN funding 2004/05 

Nursery, Data source: Key stage 1 Reading test data. 

Reception, Calculation: number of pupils not achieving 2C or below in the last 

Years 1 and 2 four years. 

Weighting: Nursery (0.75), Reception (1.25), Year 1 (1.5) and 

Year 2 (1.0) 

Years 3 to 6 Data source: Key stage 1 Reading test data 

Calculation: number of current pupils not achieving 2C or below 

Weighting: Year 3 (1.0), Year 4 (1.0), Year 5 (1.0) and Year 6 

(1.0) 

The remaining 10% of the funding to be distributed on the basis of the 

number of pupils eligible for Free School Meals. That number to be 

calculated on the basis of the number of pupils in Reception to Year 6 

eligible for free school meals on January 2004 PLASC day, divided by 

the number of Reception to Year 6s pupils on that day, multiplied by 

the number of full-time equivalent pupils enrolled at the school on that 

day. 

A minimum level of funding be introduced for the proxy factor for 

high incidence SEN, representing the 2003/04 allocation plus 4%. 

d) Introduction of a factor providing minimum protection for primary 

schools. This factor is necessary to allow the Minimum Funding 

Guarantee (MFG) to operate. Schools are entitled to the higher of the 

formula allocation (for the comparable factors) and the MFG. 



6.2 Some primary schools raised the issue of reverting to the historic 

approach to funding Newly Qualified Teachers, with updates of funding each 

month for any changes to the numbers of teachers. It is not proposed to 

revert to this method as it would run counter to the principles of having as 

much funding as possible in schools’ budgets on 1 st April and of encouraging 

schools as much as possible to consider their revenue budget as a single 

resource, rather than individual components. 

6.3 Discussions with primary colleagues led to a brief consideration of the 

possible use of ACORN data, instead of free school meals eligibility data for 

the high incidence SEN proxy factor for 2004/05. Officers did not have 

sufficient information available in time to use them for 2004/05, but would 

expect this to be considered carefully for use in future years. 

6.4 The Primary Forum response to the first consultation paper noted the 

outcomes of the work of the Foundation Stage Working Group and asked that 

the LEA set out its intentions on this and the arrangements for SEN proxy 

factors, such that schools and the LEA are clear of the direction of travel by 

September 2004. Officers are working on a timetable and this will be 

discussed through the Strategic Advisory Groups. 

Secondary 

6.5 There are three proposed changes for the secondary school formula: 

a) The introduction of a closing schools factor to allow for the 

arrangements associated with the closure of Evelyns Community 

School and the opening of Stockley Academy at the end of August 

2004. This would be a lump sum for every school due to close before 

1 st September 2004. This is the mechanism preferred by officers to 

deal with the deficit at Evelyns. As set out earlier in this paper the 

funding is available for this in the one-off windfall arising with the FSS 

for 2004/05, which will also allow £0.5m of additional growth for other 

schools that otherwise would not exist. The alternative is to provide 

for the deficit in the contingency fund. 

b) The introduction of a minimum level of funding through the proxy 

factor for high incidence SEN, representing the numbers of pupils in 

Year 7 in January 2004 with high incidence statements (according to 

2004/05 statementing criteria) multiplied by 1.583 (ie one year and 7 

months), multiplied by half of the average value of a high incidence 

statement. This responds to the concerns of some schools where 

they were admitting pupils with high incidence statements, but their 

level of funding was significantly less than previously. 

c) Introduction of a factor providing minimum protection for secondary 

schools. This factor is necessary to allow the Minimum Funding 

Guarantee to operate. 



6.6 The Hillingdon Association of Secondary Headteachers asked that two 

changes be made to the funding formula for 2004/05. 

6.7 The first was that the OFSTED Free School Meal bands be used 

instead of the average Free School Meal eligibility for the social deprivation 

factor. Officers have no problem in principle with this alternative approach 

and would be prepared to consult separately on this change. Unfortunately, 

there has not been the opportunity for further discussion on how this change 

might work, so no alternative models have been developed. If secondary 

schools are funded at or very close to the MFG, any change in the social 

deprivation factor is likely to be cosmetic (ie most schools would continue to 

be funded at the MFG level). Regrettably, there is little time to develop 

models at this stage and it may be best to consider the use of OFSTED FSM 

bands alongside the ACORN data for 2005/06 and beyond. 

6.8 The second was that the fixed factor should be reduced in 2004/05 to 

80% of the absolute value of that factor for 2003/04, then to 50% of the 

absolute 2003/04 value for 2005/06 and for the factor to disappear completely 

in 2006/07. This proposal was put forward with no explanation as to the 

reasoning behind it and it was acknowledged that the proposal had not yet 

been formally endorsed by HASH at their meeting in January 2004. No 

further information has been provided about either the status of or the 

rationale for such a change. 

6.9 Officers would have concerns about a proposal which removed protection 

for the smallest secondary schools without some analysis of the impact that it 

would have, the reasoning behind it and the evidence that demonstrated the 

reasonableness of funding a school of 1,700 and a school of 450 with no 

account taken of the different proportions of fixed to variable costs. If 

secondary schools believe that this, collectively, is appropriate in principle, 

this ought to be considered in more detail for 2005/06. The MFG may prove 

to be a barrier to introducing a phased withdrawal of this factor as the impact 

of it may not be experienced by schools in the way that the initial phasing 

intended. 

Special 

6.10 The only proposal is to introduce a factor providing minimum 

protection for special schools. This factor is necessary to allow the Minimum 

Funding Guarantee to operate. 

Nursery 

6.11 It is a requirement that the Governing Bodies of maintained nursery 

schools are consulted on two issues for the first time for April 2004. 

6.12 The first is the determination of a delegated budget for the school 

within the Fair Funding scheme. Currently, maintained nursery schools (ie 

McMillan Nursery in the case of Hillingdon) are not part of Fair Funding. 



6.13 The second is to introduce a formula for the school. It is proposed 

that the place factors and nursery factor for McMillan be the same as those for 

similar sized nursery classes in maintained primary and infant schools, and 

that a lump sum factor be added to recognise the responsibilities of a 

separate infant school. 

7. Standards Funds – Take up of grants 

Advanced Skills Teachers 

7.1 Schools Forum recommended that schools with Advanced Skills 

Teachers be invited to make a voluntary contribution to the matched funding 

for the Standards Fund for 2004/05. They recommended that, should a single 

school in a sector choose not to buy back, that the grant not be taken up at all 

for that sector. It is proposed to adopt this method for funding ASTs for 

2004/05. 

School Development Grant 

7.4 The proposals for the split between the retained and devolved amounts of 

the Schools Development Grant are to be consistent with the 

recommendations of Schools Forum. Of the £0.416m which the LEA wished 

to retain for a range of on-going SEN initiatives, £35k for the Schools SEN 

Training Programme is to be devolved to schools. Of the £93k for the support 

staff training and development component, funding is to be retained for 

primary schools, but devolved for secondary and special schools. 

8. Standards Funds – distribution issues 

8.1 Standards Funds will be distributed on the basis required by the DfES in 

the first instance (eg where a minimum level of budget must be provided) or, 

in the absence of that, on the basis used in 2003/04. 

8.2 For that part of the School Development Grant in excess of the 

minimum required, this will be distributed on the basis of the PLASC January 

2004 full-time equivalent pupil numbers. 

9. Data in the draft budgets 

9.1 Schools are invited to check the data used for their school and to alert the 

School Finance Team of any errors or omissions. There are some aspects to 

the data to which schools need to pay particular attention: 

a) Nursery sizes. Where there is evidence of a significant variation 

between the actual number of pupils enrolled for a nursery class and 

the number of places for which that nursery is funded, the LEA will 

propose to increase or decrease the size of the funding. The schools 

identified below are ones where officers have identified such 



variances and this consultation paper is the mechanism being used to 

both alert those schools of the proposed change and to consult them 

on their views, prior to a final decision being taken. 

Table 9: Schools where nursery funding is proposed to change. 

School Current Place 

Size 

Proposed 

place size 

September 

2004 

Likely change in 

funding in a full 

year 

(decease)/increase 

Belmore 45 fte places 40 fte places (£28,062) 

Bourne 20 fte places 15 fte places (£2,097) 

Charville 45 fte places 35 fte places (£30,161) 

Field End Infant 50 fte places 60 fte places £12,887 

Glebe 20 fte places 15 fte places (£2,097) 

Guru Nanak Primary 15 fte places - (£58,193) 

Hermitage 20 fte places 15 fte places (£2,097) 

Hillingdon 35 fte places 30 fte places (£19,410) 

Rabbsfarm 20 fte places 25 fte places £2,099 

St Bernadettes 30 fte places 25 fte places (£2,097) 

b) Per pupil statemented allocations. Schools are asked to consider 

these carefully and to identify any instances where pupils are no 

longer at the school or where the category or year group is not 

appropriate. Please alert the Special Needs Team if you have any 

queries on this matter. 

c) Post 16 Funding. The figures in the draft for secondary schools 

reflect those provided by the Learning and Skills Council. There is 

certainly a query regarding the information provided for Evelyns 

School, but other schools may have other issues. Discussions with 

the LSC directly may resolve any queries, otherwise contact the 

School Finance Team. 

d) Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant. The revised data from PLASC 

2004 is not yet available. Illustrations will be despatched to schools 

shortly. 

e) Minimum Funding Guarantee. Schools are asked to consider the 

calculation here very carefully as in many cases it is this calculation 

which will drive the level of the budget, rather than some of the other 

components of the pure formula. 

f) Key Stage 1 attainment data. Key Stage 1 data is to be used as a 

proxy for Foundation / Key Stage 1 pupils in infant / primary schools, 

as well as for Key Stage 2 pupils in junior / primary schools. 

For infant / primary schools the data should reflect the scores of the 

pupils who sat the tests when they were in that school over the last 

four years. That is what the draft budgets reflect. 



For junior / primary schools the data should reflect the scores of the 

pupils who are currently in Key Stage 2. Currently, the draft budgets 

reflect the scores of the pupils who attended the school in the year 

immediately following the one they took the test. The final budgets 

will update the data to reflect the pupil profile now. This is only likely 

to result in significant change where the pupil profile is radically 

different to the one previously, due to pupil turnover. 

10. Timetable 

10.1 Timescales are short, but the issues have been considered previously 

by schools in the first consultation paper. Formal consultation responses are 

due by noon on Wednesday 25 th February 2004. This is so that the Schools 

Forum papers can be prepared and despatched in time for their meeting on 

3 rd March 2004. Schools may wish to convey key issues to their Schools 

Forum representatives. 

10.2 Officers will be attending the LEA headteachers meeting on 1 st March 

2004 and will discuss issues arising from this paper. Council will agree final 

budgets for all services at its meeting on 26 th February 2004. 

10.3 Cabinet will consider the arrangements for Fair Funding for 2004/05 and 

the allocation of budgets within the Schools Budget at its meeting on 4 th 

March 2004. The views of Schools Forum will be reported to Cabinet before 

they make final decisions. 



Appendix 1 

Extract from Draft Minutes of Schools Forum (22 nd January 2004), where 

they considered the issues raised in Consultation Paper (No1). Officer 

comments have been added in parenthesis. 

1. Are there any observations on the way in which it is proposed that minimum 

budgets for schools be calculated? 

No problems were identified at this stage. 

(Officers have identified modifications to the operation of the MFG which are 

the subject of consultation in this paper). 

2. What advice would schools give the LEA in determining priorities for the 

allocation of any growth which might exist within the available funding, 

beyond unavoidable commitments and other earmarked sums? 

Schools Forum endorsed the views of Primary Forum and Hillingdon 

Association of Secondary Headteachers that they were deeply concerned at 

the lack of movement to close the £1.2m gap between the Formula Spending 

Share and the Schools Budget. 

Schools Forum agreed that Cabinet be reminded that, at the Schools Forum 

meeting in February 2003, they asked that: “Cabinet gives a commitment 

to fund schools at the level of the FSS within three years”. Given that a 

year has passed, they would now expect the gap to be closed within two 

years. They strongly recommended that the £1.1m growth be included in 

this year’s budget as the first step in addressing parity with FSS by 2005/06. 

In considering the priorities for the estimated £1.2m headroom in the Schools 

Budget for 2004/05, Schools Forum agreed by 9 votes to 0, with 3 

abstentions, that: 

“Forum advises Cabinet that the per pupil funding position for each 

sector for 2004/05 should be at the Outer London Borough mean and 

that for future years Cabinet should increase beyond that to reflect the 

higher costs in Hillingdon schools." 

It was recommended that any growth be distributed through age-weighted 

pupil factors. 

Schools Forum confirmed that they want officers to seek a dispassionate 

view of the report prepared by primary colleagues on the relative funding for 

primary and secondary schools in Hillingdon, compared to other outer 

London Boroughs. David Tully is to deal with this and report back. 

(Officers intend to recommend to Members that the whole of any available 

growth for 2004/05 go to Primary Schools). 



3. The current calculations of the amount of funding likely to go to retained and 

devolved budgets within the Schools Budgets suggests that the retained 

element might increase by 1.2% more than the devolved element. If this 

situation were not to change, what would schools views be of the LEA 

applying to the Secretary of State for permission to increase retained 

elements in the Schools Budget by this amount in excess of the increase in 

the devolved elements in the Schools Budget? 

Schools Forum did not support the increase in retained elements of more 

than the increase in devolved elements within the Schools Budget. Members 

asked for further details of the components of the Schools Budget. 

(Officers indicate in the paper that this is no longer an issue.) 

4. All LEAs have access to a Universal Support Grant to assist schools in 

difficult financial circumstances. The grant is essentially an advance on the 

LEA’s funding for 2005/06. What are schools views on the principle of 

accessing this grant at all? And, if there is no objection in principle to 

accessing the grant, what advice would schools wish to give the LEA on the 

circumstances in which it might be appropriate to allocate funding from this 

grant to individual schools in financial difficulties? 

Schools Forum did not support the LEA’s access to the Universal Support 

Grant. 

(Officers do not intend to take up the Universal Support Grant) 

5. What are schools views on the need for any changes to formula factors for 

2004/05? In particular, what aspects of the proxy based high incidence SEN 

funding arrangements need to change for 2004/05? 

Schools Forum supported the conclusions reached by Resources SAG the 

previous day on the issues of SEN funding. The Resources SAG outcomes 

had been reported as follows: 

“It was felt by Resources SAG that much more time needed to be invested by 

LEA officers on this issue. They felt that major changes could not take place 

for 2004/05, but that the LEA still had to put forward a firm proposal on how 

the arrangements would operate for 2004/05. 

It was agreed that there would be an urgent meeting offered to primary 

headteachers (particularly those on Resources SAG and Inclusion SAG, but 

open to all) to explore the issues regarding the proxy factors. The LEA was 

asked to produce a timetable to identify what work needed to be done, what 

the plan for savings in the LEA being passed to schools was, and when it 

would be implemented. It was expected that a firm position about the future 

of mainstream SEN funding be resolved by September 2004.” 



(Officers have had a meeting with primary colleagues and have put forward a 

firm proposal for 2004/05. A timetable for dealing with issues by September 

2004 will be considered at the next round of Strategic Advisory Group 

meetings. Consultation Paper (No 2) deals with proposed changes to 

formula factors.) 

6. The LEA is proposing to retain two elements of the School Development 

Grant for 2004/05 at the level of the retained funding for 2003/04 and for the 

type of expenditure incurred in 2003/04. What are schools’ views on this 

proposal? How ought the LEA to distribute any funding beyond the minimum 

increase for School Development Grant? 

Schools Forum supported the LEA’s proposals to retain funding for: SENJIT 

subscription (£8k); Speech and Language therapy pilots (£220k); 

Occupational therapy / physiotherapy (£43k); and the projects supporting 

inclusion (£40k), green paper (£40k), P scales (£20k) and the SEN 

component of the primary literacy strategy (£10k). This totals £381k. 

It was asked that the funding for projects be managed by the Head of 

Inclusion / SEN and that a report be provided next year identifying how the 

funding was used and how effective it had been. It was also asked that a 

transparent approach be adopted in advertising the availability of funding and 

evaluating candidate projects. 

Schools Forum endorsed the Resources SAG view that the £35k for Schools 

SEN Training be devolved and that a sector specific approach be adopted for 

the £93k Support Staff Training and Development (ie special and secondary 

devolved, primary retained). 

(Officers have included the Schools Forum recommendations in Consultation 

Paper (No 2).) 

7. Are there any other observations of schools on the funding arrangements 

for 2004/05 which they want to bring to the attention of the LEA before final 

proposals are shaped? 

Schools Forum endorsed the approach agreed by Resources SAG that 

schools with ASTs be invited to make a voluntary contribution to the matched 

cost of ASTs. A sector based approach would be adopted in that all schools 

with ASTs in a sector would need to agree to payback the matched cost for 

the grant for the sector to be taken up. 

(Officers have proposed this method for funding ASTs.) 



Appendix 2 

Analysis of Schools Budget 2003/04, split between devolved and retained 

Devolved Retained 

£'000 £'000 

1.0.1 Individual Schools Budget 121,349 0 

1.0.2 School Standards Grant 0 0 

1.0.3 Standards Fund allocation - revenue 1,733 0 

1.0.4 

Nursery School Funding (not nursery classes in 

primary schools) 235 0 

1.1.1 Provision for pupils with statements 0 1,271 

1.1.2 Specialist support; pupils with statements 0 0 

1.1.3 Specialist support; pupils without statements 0 740 

1.1.4 

Fees for pupils at independent special schools & 

abroad 0 4,316 

1.1.5 Collaboration and integration 0 0 

1.1.6 Inter-authority recoupment 0 433 

1.2.1 Pupil Referral Units 0 50 

1.2.2 Behaviour Support Implementation 0 0 

1.2.3 Education out of school 0 34 

1.2.4 

Nursery education provided other than in maintained 

nursery schools/classes 0 2,385 

1.3.1 School Meals - nursery, primary and special schools 0 0 

1.3.2 Free School Meals - eligibility 0 0 

1.3.3 Milk 0 0 

1.3.4 School Kitchens - repair and maintenance 0 0 

1.3.5 

Fees to independent schools for pupils without 

statements 0 0 

1.4.1 Insurance 0 0 

1.4.2 Museum services 0 0 

1.4.3 Library Services - nursery, primary and special schools 0 130 

1.4.4 School admissions 0 244 

1.4.5 

Licences/subscriptions (not more than 0.2% total net 

SB) 0 0 

1.4.6 School-specific contingencies 0 69 

1.4.7 Miscellaneous (not more than 0.1% total net SB) 0 54 

1.4.8 Servicing of schools forums 0 3 

1.4.9 Staff costs - supply cover (not sickness) 0 82 

1.4.10 Supply cover - long term sickness 0 0 

1.5.1 Standards Fund - Non-Devolved 0 813 

1.5.2 Non-Standards Fund specific grant 0 0 

1.5.3 Specific formula grant: Excellence in Cities (EiC) 1,484 0 

1.5.4 Performance Reward Grant 0 0 

1.6.1 Capital Expenditure from Revenue (CERA) 653 0 

1.7.1 TOTAL SCHOOLS BUDGET 125,455 10,625 



CONTROLLED DRINKING ZONES – FORMAL 

DESIGNATION 

ITEM 3 

Contact Officer: David Brough 

Telephone: 01895 250636 

SUMMARY 

This report seeks confirmation of the areas of the Borough that are to be 

recommended to the full Council for designation for controlling the drinking of 

alcohol. 


1. That, subject to 2 below, the Council be recommended to exercise its 

powers under the provisions of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 

(as amended) to designate the following areas as public places for the 

purposes of controlling the drinking of alcohol: 

• Hayes Town Centre (including Botwell Green) 

• Ruislip Town Centre (including Churchfield Gardens and Manor Farm) 

• Ruislip Manor (Victoria Road) 

• Uxbridge Town Centre (including Fassnidge Park) 

• Hillingdon Court Park 

2. That the Cabinet note the responses to public consultation received up to 

the date of its meeting and any further responses received before the 

close of consultation on 17 th March be reported to the Council meeting on 

25 th March. 

REASONS FOR OFFICER RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Cabinet has previously decided to support the principle of designating the 

places listed in recommendation 1for the purposes of controlling the drinking of 

alcohol and it is now necessary to make a formal recommendation to the Council in 

the light of consultation with the Police and the public. 


The Council is not obliged to set up controlled drinking zones and has the option of 

not proceeding with any or all of the proposals depending on the outcome of 

consultation. 


The Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee has not asked to 

comment on this subject. 



INFORMATION 

1. At the Cabinet meeting on 18 th December 2003 a report was received on the 

possible use of the Council’s powers to designate certain areas of the Borough as 

public places for the purposes of controlling the drinking of alcohol. The report 

highlighted that there were increasing problems in town centres and in a number of 

parks and open spaces caused by the drinking of alcohol and that these could be 

addressed by the Police following designation of the areas concerned by the 

Council. 

2. It was noted that the Council has to consult with the Police, the public and 

affected licensees before designating an area. Once designated there is a power for 

a Constable to require a person to stop drinking and to hand over any open or 

unopened containers of alcohol. There is not a total ban on drinking within the area 

concerned and the power is to deal with people who are creating a nuisance or 

annoyance to others or who are involved or likely to be involved in disorder. 

3. It was also noted that the local Police had already expressed support in principle 

for the designation of areas on a trial basis and that they believed it would contribute 

effectively to the community safety strategy. 

4. In the light of this information the Cabinet made the following decisions: 

(1) That approval in principle be given to the designation of the following places for 

the purposes of controlling the drinking of alcohol under the provisions of the 

Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001: 

• Hayes Town Centre 

• Ruislip Town Centre ( including Churchfield Gardens and Manor Farm) 

• Uxbridge Town Centre 

• Botwell Recreation Ground Hayes 


(2) That the designation of the selected areas be subject to the following 

conditions: 

• Confirmation by the Police and the Council’s Community Safety Team that 

there is sufficient evidence of alcohol-related crime and anti-social 

behaviour to justify this course of action and 

• Agreement between the Council and the Police on the boundaries of each 

area to be designated. 

• Consultation with the public and with licensees and other retailers within the 

proposed control zones. 

(3) That the responses to public consultation be reported to the Cabinet meeting on 

4 th March 2004 with a view to recommendations being made to the full Council 

on 25 th March for the formal designation of the selected areas. 



(4) That the operation of the zones be monitored and reviewed after 6 months’ 

operation and, if successful, additional proposals be brought forward for the 

designation of further areas subject to adequate evidence and resources for 

implementation and enforcement. 

5. At the December Cabinet meeting a request was made from the Leader of the 

Liberal Democrat Group that Ruislip Manor should be added to the list of designated 

areas and the Leader of the Council agreed that this should be investigated. When 

considering the decisions sheet at a subsequent meeting on 15 th January 2004 it 

was agreed that this area should be added. 

6. In accordance with the second resolution set out above there has been 

consultation between the Council and the Police and there have also been 

discussions about the boundaries to be adopted so that the chances of moving 

problems into an adjoining area can be minimised. The outcome of these 

discussions is set out below and plans of the proposed areas are enclosed with this 

report 

Data from the Custody Database, CADMIS Disorder and Parks Patrol during 2003 

Uxbridge Town Centre (including Fassnidge Park) 

Custody Type Custody CADMIS Disorder CADMIS Disorder Parks Patrol 

Drunk and Disorderly 64 Type 34: Drunkenness 162 4 

Drunk in public place 10 

Drunk on licensed premises 8 

Disorderly conduct/behaviour 13 Type 26: Disturbance - public 537 

Total 95 699 4 798 

Hayes Town Centre (including Botwell Green) 

Drunk and Disorderly 25 Type 34: Drunkenness 9 




Total 32 82 0 114 

Ruislip Town Centre (including Churchfield Gardens and Manor Farm) 





Total 2 18 0 20 

Ruislip Manor (Victoria Road) 





Total 3 11 0 14 

Hillingdon Court Park 

Drunk and Disorderly 0 Type 34: Drunkenness 0 3 




Total 0 8 3 11 



Notes: 

(1) Custody - gives details of people arrested by Police and in Police Custody. 

(2) CADMIS (Computer Aided Dispatch Management Information System) – this is 

information from the telephone calls that the CAD room takes from the public 

(e.g. 999 calls). 

7. The official data for the selected sites is in some cases lower than might be 

expected. It needs to be borne in mind that these records are based on those 

received through the computerised system and do not include calls to local Police 

Community Action Team Officers. In the case of Manor Farm Ruislip there has also 

been a petition and many complaints to the Council about vandalism and anti-social 

behaviour, some of which is related to the consumption of alcohol. 

8. Public consultation is currently taking place on the proposals and a copy of the 

consultation document is attached to this report. Letters have been sent to local 

residents associations and other groups. The Police are arranging the distribution of 

copies to licensees and to local residents and the Uxbridge and Hayes Town Centre 

Managers are using their networks to collect views of businesses and other relevant 

organisations 

9. The legislation requires that a public notice is placed in a local newspaper 

circulating in the district and that 28 days are given for responses. The notice 

appeared in the Gazette on 18 th February and as a result the consultation period will 

not close until 17 th March. The Cabinet will be informed of responses received by 

the date of its meeting and a summary of later responses will be submitted to the 

Council meeting on 25 th March. 


Financial Implications 

10. The report to the December 2003 meeting estimated that it would cost in the 

region of £10,000 to carry out the public consultation and to erect signs on the 

boundaries of the areas to be designated. This cost will be met from within the 

Community Safety budget. 

11. There will also be resource implications for the Parks Patrol Service in enforcing 

the provisions within those parks that are designated and they have been fully 

involved in the development of the proposals. 

Legal implications 

12. The Criminal Justice and Police Act 2002 (as amended) specifies various 

procedural steps that the Council must take before designating an area and these 

are set out in the report. 



Other consultations 

13. The Green Spaces Division of the Environmental Services Group initiated the 

first report to the Cabinet and have been involved in the follow up work. 


14. The arrangements for consultations with the Police, licensees and the public are 

set out in the report. 


Report and decisions of Cabinet meeting 18 th December 2003 



CONTROLLED DRINKING ZONES FOR HILLINGDON 

YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED 

What is being proposed? 

Hillingdon Council is proposing to create Controlled Drinking Zones in the following 

locations: 

• Hayes Town Centre (including Botwell Green) 

• Ruislip Town Centre (including Churchfield Gardens and Manor Farm) 

• Ruislip Manor (Victoria Road) 

• Uxbridge Town Centre (including Fassnidge Park) 


What is a Controlled Drinking Zone? 

The Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (as amended) gives local Councils the 

power to make an Order designating a part of the Borough as a public place in order 

to control the drinking of alcohol in that area. 

Before designating an area the Council must be satisfied that there is sufficient 

nuisance, annoyance or disorder to justify its action and it must consult the Police, 

licensees, retailers and the public. 

Once an Order has been made a Constable can require a person to stop drinking in 

the designated area and to surrender any open or sealed containers of alcohol. If 

the person refuses he or she may be arrested. 

What is the penalty if somebody refuses to stop drinking? 

A Constable may issue a £40 Fixed Penalty Notice to anybody who refuses to stop 

drinking or to hand over any open or sealed containers of alcohol. A person who 

refuses may be arrested and prosecuted with a fine of up to £500. 

Will it prevent drinking in pub gardens, pavement cafés and parks? 

No, this is not a total ban on drinking of alcohol in public. The power will be used 

only if a Constable believes that the person concerned is creating a nuisance or 

annoyance to others or is involved or likely to be involved in disorder 

Why is the Council proposing to introduce these Zones now? 

There have been increasing complaints from the public about the effects of drinking 

in public places. These include vandalism, excessive noise, abusive behaviour and 

the feeling of being unsafe, especially at night time. There are also problems in some 

areas with street drinkers in the day time. 



The new Licensing Act will abolish the current controls on licensing hours later this 

year and many pubs and clubs are likely to be opening for extended hours. Nobody 

knows what effect this will have and the introduction of Controlled Drinking Zones will 

help reduce any nuisance that may arise. 

Do the Police support what is proposed? 

Yes, the Police are keen to see this new power introduced for the same reasons as 

the Council. 

How have the locations been selected? 

The Council and the Police have looked at past crime figures and complaints from 

the public and have selected those places where there are most problems. Most of 

the locations are town centres but there are also some parks. The operation of the 

Zones will be monitored and if successful they will be extended to other Town 

Centres and parks where there are problems. 

Won’t the zones just shift the problems elsewhere? 

There is clearly a danger that the designation of an area will simply move the 

nuisance into another area. The drawing of the boundaries is therefore very 

important and this is one of the reasons that the proposals for Hayes, Ruislip and 

Uxbridge also include nearby parks. The Council and the Police would particularly 

welcome comments from members of the public on the proposed boundaries using 

their local knowledge. 

Isn’t this simply dealing with the symptoms of a much deeper problem? 

Stopping individuals from drinking in public on one occasion will deal only with that 

immediate situation. The introduction of these Zones is therefore linked with other 

measures by the Council and its partners to increase youth facilities, educate young 

people about the risks of binge drinking and offer treatment for street drinkers who 

want to tackle their drink problems. 

What is the timetable for this to happen? 

Public consultation is open until 17 th March. A final decision will be made by the full 

Council meeting on 25 th March. If all goes to plan the new Zones will then be well in 

place for the summer. 

How do I make my views known? 

Please send your comments in writing to the Community Safety Team at the Civic 

Centre Uxbridge UB8 1UW or by email to mhankins@hillingdon.gov.uk Further 

information can be obtained by calling the Team on 01895 277295. 













LOCAL CULTURAL STRATEGY FOR HILLINGDON ITEM 4 

SUMMARY 

Contact Officer: Trisha Grimshaw 

Telephone: 01895 50625 

This report introduces the proposed Cultural Strategy for Hillingdon and the action 

plan for its implementation. 

RECOMMENDATION 

That members endorse the Cultural Strategy and instruct officers to implement 

the action plan. 


The report supports work to improve the quality of life in Hillingdon and the 

development of partnerships across services and with community partners. The 

adoption of the Cultural Strategy will achieve Best Value Performance Plan indicator 

BV114, which in turn contributes to the CPA assessment. 


Members can decide not to approve or to amend the Cultural Strategy. 


The Overview & Scrutiny Committee has not asked to comment on the report. 

INFORMATION 

1. In requiring local authorities to develop local cultural strategies, the Government 

asked local councils to work cross-sectorally in a partnership of services and with 

other external organisations and partners to improve the quality of life for local 

communities. 

2. Initially the development of a local Cultural Strategy was a statutory requirement. 

Following the Government review of the range of plans required of local authorities, 

a Cultural Strategy is no longer a statutory planning document, however, an 

endorsed local Cultural Strategy remains a Best Value Performance Indicator. 

3. The vision for the Cultural Strategy for Hillingdon was defined as follows: 

‘To help develop Hillingdon as a place in which residents can find fulfilment and 

achieve their potential as valued members of a community which embraces diversity 

and encourages active citizenship. Participating in cultural activities enhances quality 

of life, enriches mind and body, brings communities and generations together and 

has the power to transform peoples lives for the better’. 



4. Participating in cultural activities is for many people an essential part of their 

quality of life - for some it is developing knowledge and skills or fitness and health, it 

is the building of social networks, the fostering of self-confidence and the sense of 

well-being, the development of a sense of inclusion and prevention of feelings of 

isolation. For others it is about celebrating their cultural traditions and history and 

sharing this with others both within their own communities and more broadly. Even 

small-scale cultural activities can have a major impact on the lives of individuals and 

local communities which can read through into the local economy and have 

beneficial social and regenerative effects. 

5. The Cultural Strategy supports key objectives and the short, medium and longer 

term targets set out in the Leader’s Statement, particularly in terms of: 

• A borough of learning and culture 

• A council working in partnership with its communities and partners 

• A borough where opportunities are open to all 

• A cleaner, more pleasant borough 

6. Recent government policy documents continue to highlight the role expected of 

sport, arts, libraries, and museums, galleries and archives, in supporting themes 

such as social inclusion by enabling people to realise their potential and contribute to 

the regeneration of a local community. It is the aim of this cultural strategy to 

maximise the opportunities for lifelong learning, putting people and groups in touch, 

helping people to engage with what is available, making connections, and supporting 

easier access. 

7. Cultural Strategy Format - attached as Appendix 1 

Section 1 

Section 2 

Section 3 

Section 4 

Appendix 2 

The case for culture 

Findings from surveys and consultation 

Local and national frameworks and research 

Themes, aims and priorities of the Cultural Strategy 

Cultural Strategy action plan 

Key themes of the Cultural Strategy 

8. The Cultural Strategy, set out in full in Section 4, has three main themes to give a 

clear focus on what is important for the borough and how these ambitions we will 

achieve our ambitions: 

A: Hillingdon People – everyone should have the chance to enjoy and benefit from 

cultural opportunities. 

B: Hillingdon Spaces and Places – the importance of our built and natural 

environments need to be promoted and opportunities provided for everyone to 

benefit from them now and into the future. 



C: Hillingdon Partners – every organisation, whether in the public, voluntary or 

private sectors should have an active role in developing culture and improving our 

quality of life. 

9. Each theme has a set of aims and priorities. The priorities for the Cultural 

Strategy are determined as follows: 

Theme A: 

Hillingdon People 

• A1 Ensure better access for all by developing strategies and provision that 

meet the needs of groups that do not access or make little use of our cultural 

facilities and services. 

• A2 Promote cultural activity that celebrates our diverse communities and 

develops greater understanding of the borough's rich cultural inheritance. 

• A3 Work positively with the voluntary sector and the volunteers who provide 

a wealth and variety of local sports, music, visual arts, drama, heritage, 

environmental and other activity alongside the services provided by the Council. 

• A4 Improve our communication with local communities helping to ensure 

that they have access to information about the cultural activities and 

opportunities available. 

• A5 Ensure culture improves life opportunities for all sections of the 

community, working with partners in education, health and other sectors to 

improve individual and community opportunities and well-being. 

Theme B: Hillingdon Spaces and Places 

• B1 Widen access to and enhance the opportunities to benefit from 

Hillingdon's cultural spaces and places so that everyone can enjoy Hillingdon's 

considerable assets. 

• B2 Work to improve the quality and range of cultural facilities available to 

our residents and try to ensure that we can respond in relevant and exciting 

ways to changing and developing needs for cultural expression. 

• B3 Ensure we provide a range of appropriate facilities for children and 

young people that are attractive to them and that we create safe environments 

for children and young people, particularly those who may feel excluded for 

whatever reason. 

• B4 Support initiatives to preserve and enhance our natural and built heritage 

seeking to maximise community access to and appreciation of our heritage 

whilst preserving it for future generations. 



Theme C: Hillingdon Partners 

• C1 Work with other cultural providers to help deliver the Cultural Strategy’s 

priorities and to ensure a high profile for cultural development to help meet the 

quality of life objectives for the borough. 

• C2 Extend working links between cultural providers and services and 

education, youth, health, environmental, community, and other agencies to 

ensure that culture can play its full role in individual and community 

development. 

• C3 Enhance the community role of cultural facilities as key points for 

contact, information and communication as well as spaces enabling enjoyment 

and access to a range of leisure, educational, entertainment and cultural 

activities. 

10. The Cultural Strategy identifies the main areas of work required to deliver these 

priorities and these tasks/actions are further detailed in the action plan set out in 

Appendix 2. 

The Development of the Cultural Strategy 

11. In 2002, officers began work on the Best Value Review of Cultural Services 

(arts, leisure, libraries, music and the youth services) and individual Best Value 

reviews of these services. The programme included a wide-ranging agenda of 

consultation over several months covering general cultural issues, service specific 

consultation with the users of services, open events and consultation with the 

Citizens Panel. 

12. The Cultural Strategy is based on the outcomes of this work. The Best Value 

Review identified five key development themes which have been taken through into 

the Cultural Strategy. 

• Working together and with the community to deliver better services and 

ensuring we work closely with and support the voluntary sector 

• Increasing access to our cultural services by ensuring they are relevant and 

available to all sectors of our community 

• Improving the marketing of our services so we are better informed of need and 

can provide better information on what is available 

• Improving buildings and facilities including those not included in major new 

developments 

• Working together to improve services for young people and to meet their 

particular needs. 

13. Building on the outcomes of this Best Value Review agreed by Cabinet in June 

2003, a programme of interviews with key partners was completed during the 

summer. Meetings with young people and minority communities were arranged. 



14. A meeting was then held with representatives of services, voluntary agencies 

and a range of partners to view the evidence collected thus far and to enable 

participation in a analysis of the way forward for Hillingdon. The first draft of the 

Cultural Strategy was then circulated widely and the views and responses received 

incorporated. A seminar was held for elected members in October 2003 on the 

second draft of the Cultural Strategy and some further refinements made. 

15. During the autumn 2003, further meetings and discussions have been held to 

explore particular aspects of the strategy. Cross-service planning events have been 

held to support further exploration of collaborative working to deliver some of the 

priorities of the Strategy, to secure commitment to undertaking this work and build 

the projects into service plans. 

Links to Other Council Plans and Strategies 

16. The Cultural Strategy underpins and links into many of the strategies and plans 

of the authority, including: 

• Library Service Position Statement 

• Green Spaces Strategy 

• Education Development Plan 2 

• Community Safety Strategy 

• Transforming Youth Work plan (draft) 

• Arts and Leisure Services team plans 

17. These plans already include strategies, projects and programmes of work that 

support and enhance the cultural life of the borough. The Cultural Strategy 

examines where services and partners can work collaboratively together in a joinedup 

way to create new opportunities, widen access and broaden participation and 

address needs of all parts of the community. 

18. The Cultural Strategy identifies the need for a fundamental revision of the Sport 

and Recreation Strategy and the creation of an Arts Strategy as well as the need for 

an agreed Corporate strategy for working with the partners in the voluntary sector. 

Community Plan/Local Strategic Partnership 

19. The implementation of the Cultural Strategy has to be closely interlinked with the 

Community Plan. Both plans have at their core the intention to improve the quality of 

life of local people, both actively seek to broaden opportunities for all sections of the 

community, the delivery of both will be through a rich mix of providers and their aims 

and objectives are determined by local views and aspirations. A process will need to 

be developed to enable proposed cultural activities to be included in the prioritisation 

for inclusion in the Community Plan. 

The Cultural Contribution to Achieving Future Cross-cutting Objectives 

20. Culture’s contribution to improving the well-being of communities increasingly 

features in emerging national policy initiatives and proposals. The Statement of 



Shared Priorities (2003) that sets out central and local government’s commitment to 

improving local services through investment and reform focuses on quality of life 

issues. Culture and the implementation of the cultural strategy can make a 

substantial contribution to the delivery of crosscutting themes such as: 

• Raising standards in schools 

• Improving the quality of life of children, young people, families at risk and older 

people 

• Creating safer and stronger communities 

• Transforming our local environment 

• Promoting the economic vitality of communities 

Capacity to Deliver the Cultural Strategy 

21. The Strategy identifies areas for development and the need for certain 

tools/resources to support achieving change. These include: 

• An annual market research survey undertaken corporately to generate fuller 

current data covering the cultural needs and aspirations of the residents of 

Hillingdon to support the development of plans and projects. 

• ACORN data for areas beyond the boundaries of Hillingdon for corporate use. 

• Training programme for officers on community profiling. 

• Better promotion of cultural activities in the community is a key strategic 

objective. A part time support post to undertake the organisation/collection of 

information for a regular sponsored listing of cultural events and activities 

organised both by services and by voluntary and community organisations. An 

external partner would be sought for the advertising content, production and 

distribution of such a Hillingdon listing. 

• Arts Development Officer (SO2) to work with schools and community groups to 

maximise opportunities to enhance pupils' experience, support raising 

achievement, developing projects to extend access and build capacity and selfesteem 

in communities and linking to the Extended Schools programme. 

22. Officers have not made a growth bid in relation to the Cultural Strategy for 

2004/05. As work on delivering the strategy develops , officers will need to submit 

proposals to enable the strategy to fully progress. 


23. There are no legal implications 

RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS 

24. The report identifies priorities for service initiatives, but this includes specific 

proposals which will have resource implications. The ‘Capacity to deliver’ section of 

the report identifies an additional Arts Officer and a part time support post. These 

posts would cost in the region of 40k. 



These items would need to be considered as part of the budget setting process for 

future years. 

PROPERTY IMPLICATIONS 

25. Property Services welcome the development of the Cultural Strategy for 

Hillingdon and will work with Cultural Services in the implementation of the action 

plan. 


Best Value Review of Cultural Services - Cabinet June 2003 



HILLINGDON LOCAL CULTURAL STRATEGY Appendix 1 

Section 1 

Introduction 

THE CASE FOR CULTURE 

This document shows how Hillingdon Council and its partners will work together to 

create and extend opportunities to take part in cultural activities available to people 

living and working in or visiting Hillingdon. It is intended to be a strategy for everyone 

involved in making or enjoying cultural activity. 

WHAT IS CULTURE? 

Cultural activities can inspire, educate, support the local economy and give immense 

pleasure and personal satisfaction. Culture is key to quality of life and to mental and 

physical well-being. It is an inclusive concept that embraces a wide variety of 

activities, places, values and beliefs that contribute to a sense of identity and pride 

for everyone in our communities. 

Culture promotes understanding and a sense of belonging and cohesion and can 

bring together people from diverse cultural, faith and historic backgrounds. Cultural 

activities offer a wide range of opportunities for people of all ages, abilities and 

interests to realise their potential, to feel a sense of achievement, to increase social 

contacts and develop a sense of well-being. A cultural strategy will make a 

significant contribution to the health and lives of individuals and communities. 

Many facilities, activities and opportunities for cultural involvement already exist in 

Hillingdon and people living in, working in or visiting Hillingdon can spend time in 

many pleasurable and rewarding ways. Across our communities are thousands of 

people who regularly participate in cultural activities, as, for example, being a 

member of an audience for a choral society concert, taking a role in a theatrical 

production, visiting an exhibition of the work of a local artist, supporting local 

societies/groups by giving time to serve on a management committee. 

People in Hillingdon take part in cultural activities every day when they: 

• Research their family tree in the local history room in Uxbridge Library 

• Help out as a cricket or hockey coach in a local sports club 

• Enjoy a wine-tasting session or study garden design with the Hillingdon 

branch of the University of the Third Age 

• Go to see a film 

• Pilot a narrow boat through Coppermill Lock or paddle a canoe at the Outdoor 

Activities Centre in Harefield 

• Join in a production with Magnetic North Youth Theatre at Compass or learn 

animation skills 

• Improve DJ ing skills at West Drayton Youth Centre or practise street dance in 

Hayes Campus 

• Go for a picnic in Colne Valley Park 



• Sing in a Tamil choir at Hayes Festival or join with friends in a henna painting 

session run by Hillingdon Asian Women’s Group 

• Learn to play violin or guitar with the borough’s Music Service 

• Walk for health in one of Hillingdon’s many green spaces 

Many in the borough, too, earn a living from culture and leisure, working in sports 

centres, Fitness Zones or libraries, providing educational activities for old or young. 

New technologies are part of our cultural infrastructure and make an invaluable 

contribution not only to our quality of life but also to the local economy. 

WHY A CULTURAL STRATEGY? 

The Government has asked local councils to work in partnership with a wide range of 

other organisations, to improve the quality of life for local communities. In order to 

be clear about the best way to tackle Hillingdon’s needs, the outcomes of the 

consultation for the Community Plan and the work supporting the recent Best Value 

Review of Cultural Services were used to inform the Strategy. 

To realise the aims of the Strategy, the council will need to work increasingly crosssectorally, 

and collaboratively with voluntary bodies and private sector companies, 

and look for support from regional organisations and our neighbours in West London. 

Having a strategy should help to: 

• Celebrate and make the most of Hillingdon’s many assets - its people, its 

places and its activities 

• Communicate more effectively so that everyone can clearly know what is 

going on in the borough. 

• Collaborate in bringing communities together, and help to make Hillingdon a 

harmonious, dynamic and prosperous borough 

• Promote the wealth of talent and activity already present in the area 

• Plan and act jointly with our partners to increase opportunities for all to enjoy 

and take part in arts, sports, leisure or heritage activities 

• Pool resources, skills and potential to make the most of joint working and 

helping to lever in additional benefits to the community 

THE VISION 

To help develop Hillingdon as a place in which residents can find fulfilment and 

achieve their potential as valued members of a community which embraces diversity 

and encourages active citizenship. Participating in cultural activities enhances 

quality of life, enriches mind and body, brings communities and generations together 

and has the power to transform people’s lives for the better. 



Section 2 

Examples of the findings from consultation and surveys 

The Council has undertaken a number of surveys to assess which services are used 

by residents and how satisfied they are with them. 

It is clear from both surveys and consultation that cultural services and facilities are 

of great importance to people in Hillingdon. They are services that people choose to 

use - be it participating in a theatre production, exercising, swimming or borrowing 

books from the library. 

Asked about which cultural services are most used those surveyed said that: 

• Libraries are the most regularly used service with over 70% of people using 

them at least once a year, with 53% using the Central Library 

• Parks and playgrounds are also popular with nearly 70% of people using them 

• The Beck Theatre is visited by 37% of people with at least 20% people also 

visiting the Compass Theatre and Winston Churchill Hall 

• Swimming pools are the most popular sport and leisure facility and are used 

by 35% of people with other sports centres attracting 16% of people 

• Museums and Galleries are visited by 54% of survey respondents but this will 

include visiting places outside Hillingdon. Within the borough the Cow Byre 

Gallery attracts 23% and the Manor Farm Site 20% of respondents. 

When asked what cultural activities were most important to them, the 

respondents said that: 

• Reading is enjoyed by practically everyone, 98% rate this as most important 

• Listening to the radio, to recorded music and watching television are also 

important to at least 80% of people 

• Shopping is important to 85% of people 

• Going to parks is important to over 80% of people, with walking or rambling 

enjoyed by over 70% 

• Libraries are important to nearly 80% of people 

• Cinemas are important to over 70% of people 

How satisfied are people with the cultural provision in the borough? 

• A very high proportion of people, up to 93%, are at least satisfied with their 

local or the Central Library 

• The Hayes Carnival also achieved satisfaction ratings of around 90% 

• Users of venues like the Beck Theatre, Compass Theatre, Winston Churchill 

Hall give these venues high satisfaction ratings, sometimes of 90% 

• Golf courses achieve the highest rating for sports facilities with 85% finding 

them at least satisfactory 

• Swimming pools achieve a satisfaction rating of over 70% 



Whilst there was obvious appreciation of many of Hillingdon's cultural facilities only a 

very small number of residents surveyed expressed themselves as very 

satisfied with some services such as youth centres, sports in parks, parks and 

playgrounds, sports centres and swimming pools. 

In addition, when asked what services were least well provided for in the borough, 

over 50% of people surveyed considered that the borough lacked 

• opportunities for visiting historic houses and sites, 

• live sports 

• youth centres 

• events 

• a museum 

• reading and writing groups. 

Young people were also asked about cultural provision in the borough. They 

appreciate the library book and video collections and quiet study areas, summer arts 

and drama programmes, some of the youth centre activities and the discounts that 

are available to them. But they disliked the limited nature of some services including 

library opening hours, leisure and fun facilities at swimming pools, the poor condition 

of some buildings, the high cost of activities and limited publicity. 

Young people want to see a range of activities which are suited to them, not too 

distant and at prices they can afford including paintballing, ice-skating, 

skateboarding, bowling and snooker. They would like to see more music and media 

projects; a large-scale leisure pool and more sports clubs open to all abilities and 

less gender discrimination across sports. 

When asked what would most improve their ability to benefit from cultural 

services and activities in the borough, residents said: 

• Better information about what was available to people in Hillingdon was felt to 

be important by over 90% of residents 

• Improved parks and green spaces was supported by 90% and cleaner streets, 

better public toilets were felt important by nearly 90% 

• Community safety was considered an important factor by 85% 

• Better buildings and facilities were also an important factor with over 80% of 

residents feeling improvement would improve enjoyment 

• Easier parking and better public transport were considered important by over 

75% 

• Pricing and more live shows and events were also important to over 75% of 

people. 



Section 3 Local frameworks and national policy initiatives 

The Best Value Review of Cultural Services (Libraries, Arts, Leisure, Youth and 

Music Services) agreed by Cabinet in June 2003, set out a programme with five 

themes which have been carried forward into the work for the Cultural Strategy. 

• Working together, and with the community to deliver better services and 

ensuring we work closely with and support the voluntary sector 

• Increasing access to our cultural services by ensuring they are relevant and 

available to all sectors of our community 

• Improving the marketing of our services so we are better informed of need 

and can provide better information on what is available 

• Improving buildings and facilities including those not included in major new 

developments 

• Working together to improve services for young people and to meet their 

particular needs. 

As part of the above programme, individual Best Value Reviews were completed for 

the Leisure Service, Library Service, Arts Service, Youth Service and Music Service. 

The resulting approved action plans set out three-year programmes for service 

improvement. 

Existing Service plans and strategies 

The development of the Cultural Strategy has to be viewed in the context of existing 

service plans and strategies, e.g. 

• Library Service Position Statement 2003/04. Responds to the DCMS guidance 

and requirements set out in ‘Framework for the Future’ 

• Green Spaces strategy 

• Draft ‘Transforming Youth Work’ plan 

• Educational Development Plan (EDP2) 

• Specific sports strategies 

• Arts and Leisure Services team plans 

• Community Safety strategy 

• Corporate ICT strategy, including plans to deliver e-government 

• Hillingdon Grid for Learning plans 

The Council's plans and framework 

Hillingdon’s Cultural Strategy needs to respond to residents' views and their 

experience of cultural life in the borough. It will also support and link with ways in 

which the Council is already improving services and working with its partners to 

respond to residents' needs and views. 

The Council Leader’s Statement, 2003/2004 asserts that Hillingdon will be 'A 

borough of learning and culture'. The statement identifies a number of key points 

that support cultural development of the borough: 



• Continuing investment in front line services including parks, the environment 

and libraries 

• Improvements in library stock, opening hours and in library buildings 

• The Chrysalis environmental programme with £0.75m available each year 

• Additional funding for Youth Services of £0.8m 

• Support for improvements in our town centres 

The Cultural Strategy has to work closely with the Community Plan for the borough. 

Working together for a better future sets out six key aims for the Council and its 

key partners, including Brunel University, the Police and the Primary Care Trust, to 

regenerate and modernise Hillingdon and to develop strong, secure, self confident 

and healthy communities. The aims are to make Hillingdon: 

• A borough of learning and culture 

• A safer borough 

• A cleaner and more pleasant borough 

• A borough with improving health, housing and social care 

• An economically prosperous borough 

• A borough where opportunities are open to all 

The vision of the Local Strategic Partnership is to ensure Hillingdon is a pleasant and 

vibrant place to live and work, where every member of its communities has access to 

excellent services and the opportunity to fulfil their potential. This links in turn to the 

vision and ambition of creating a borough 'where cultural, leisure and educational 

opportunities are open to all children, young people and adults to improve their skill 

levels, education and creativity so as to enhance their working and leisure lives'. 

(Community Plan 2003/04). 

The implementation of the Cultural Strategy is best linked with the Community Plan. 

Both plans have at their core the intention to improve the quality of life of local 

people, both actively seek to broaden opportunities for all sections of the community, 

the delivery of both will be through a rich mix of providers and their aims and 

objectives are determined by local views and aspirations. A process will need to be 

developed to enable proposed cultural activities to be included in the prioritisation for 

inclusion in the Community Plan. 

National policy initiatives and research 

Culture’s contribution to improving the well-being of communities increasingly 

features in the emerging policy initiatives and proposals. 

The Statement of Shared Priorities (2003) that sets out central and local 

government’s commitment to improving local services through investment and 

reform focuses on quality of life issues. Culture can make a substantial contribution 

to the delivery of crosscutting themes such as: 

• Raising standards in schools 

• Improving the quality of life of children, young people, families at risk and 

older people 

• Creating safer and stronger communities 



• Transforming our local environment 

• Promoting the economic vitality of communities 

The development of the Comprehensive Performance Assessment 2005 round is 

likely to bring an increase in the recognition of culture’s contribution to community 

well-being as a core service. 

A MORI presentation (2002) on Quality of Life indicators included Access to Culture, 

Sports and Leisure Facilities and Community activities amongst key items which 

people think are important to making somewhere a good place to live. Facilities and 

activities for young people scored high on the list of things that would make places 

even better. 

The ODPM’s survey of English Housing which lists aspects of their area that 

householders would like to see improved, revealed that 38% of those surveyed 

(2001/02) wanted opportunities and facilities for children and young people. 

A new measure of child poverty proposed by Department of Works and Pensions will 

include lack of access to leisure, hobbies, swimming and other cultural activities as 

an indicator of deprivation. 

In all these policy initiatives and programmes, the recognition of a basic 

entitlement to opportunities for cultural expression and recreation is 

increasingly taken to be a significant part of the life of every individual. 



Section 4 

AIMS AND PRIORITIES FOR THE CULTURAL STRATEGY 

Culture can make a major contribution to social, economic and environmental wellbeing 

and to the health of individuals and communities. This Strategy will show how 

it is intended to work together to improve the quality of life right across Hillingdon. 

We want to do this by bringing culture within everyone’s reach, to make sure that 

activities thrive in the longer-term and by building on active partnerships. 

Three themes for the Cultural Strategy have been chosen to give a clear focus on 

what we believe is important for the borough and how we will achieve our ambitions: 

Hillingdon People – everyone should have the chance to enjoy and benefit 

from cultural opportunities 

Hillingdon Spaces and Places – the importance of our built and natural 

environments needs to be promoted and opportunities provided for everyone 

to benefit from them now and into the future 

Hillingdon Partners – every organisation, whether in the public, voluntary or 

private sectors should have the chance to play an active role in developing 

culture and improving our quality of life. 

The aims and priorities of our strategy reflect the outcomes of the surveys, 

consultation, interviews and meetings. It seeks to address the concerns and needs 

identified by residents of Hillingdon. It will link with and support other initiatives 

seeking to improve the lives of everyone living in or visiting the borough. 

A. HILLINGDON PEOPLE 

People are at the very heart of the Cultural Strategy. They are the most important 

source of creativity and inspiration, past, present and future. We want our residents 

to enjoy life to the full and to have the opportunities for developing a rewarding and 

healthy life. 

The borough’s population now has a fifth of residents below the age of sixteen and 

20% of all Hillingdon people will belong to ethnic minority communities by 2011. 

Together with the 12,000 students at Brunel University who come from 110 different 

countries, the borough enjoys a rich and vibrant mix of nationalities and their 

cultures. 

Surveys by the Council indicate that some groups do not utilise many facilities. 

Consultation suggests that these groups, including some children and young people 

and ethnic minorities, do feel excluded and do not feel that their cultural needs are 

being addressed. It is also necessary to ensure that the needs of older-people, 

people with disabilities or learning needs to engage in a full cultural life are met. 



Much of our cultural life is dependant on volunteers and the work of voluntary groups 

and clubs. The role of volunteers and voluntary organisations is an essential part of 

the picture in Hillingdon, a natural extension of what the Council itself provides. We 

must do more to actively support and encourage this sector. If the Council is to work 

in effective partnership with the voluntary sector it needs to speak with a clear and 

consistent voice and promote the work of volunteers. 

Consultation consistently indicated a demand for better information on cultural 

activities and the strategy needs to identify ways in which it can address this issue. 

Aims 

Culture has the power to transform the lives of individuals, families and whole 

communities. If we are to build a better quality of life for the people of Hillingdon, the 

Cultural Strategy should help ensure that: 

• Everyone can take part in cultural activities and opportunities that are 

creative, enjoyable and educational, fit in with their way of life and are 

appropriate to all ages, ethnic background, abilities and cultural heritage. 

• We help to remove barriers to participating and enjoying the cultural life of our 

area (whether through cost, lack of information or childcare, transport or 

inaccessible buildings, for example) 

• Culture plays a full role in strengthening community bonds and that we boost 

voluntary activity and make full use of cultural activities to help us bridge 

divides including those of age, income or ethnicity 

• Culture plays an important role in our economy in offering learning 

opportunities and employment for local people as well as attractions for 

visitors. 

• Culture makes a significant contribution to improving health and supporting 

active lifestyles. 

Priorities 

Our priorities for the Cultural Strategy are to: 

A1: Ensure better access for all by developing strategies and provision 

that meet the needs of groups that do not access our cultural facilities and 

services. 

We will: 

• Identify a range of routes and facilitators for finding out the needs and 

interests of groups and communities not fully benefiting from cultural 

provision and develop a phased programme to respond to these needs. 

• Ensure that cultural services work to remove, whenever possible, any 

barriers to children, young people and adults accessing services, 

including the appropriate use of new technology. 

• Ensure services have access to up to date socio-economic information 

and regular market research which covers the cultural needs and 

aspirations of the community and a more effective, integrated use is 

made of data already held. 



A2: Promote cultural activity that celebrates the diverse communities 

and develops greater understanding of the borough’s rich cultural inheritance. 

We will: 

• Work across services, with schools and other education providers and 

with community groups to develop cultural projects and activities that 

celebrate and reflect our diversity and enable creative expression. 

A3: Work positively with the voluntary sector and volunteers who 

provide a wealth and variety of local sports, music, arts, heritage, 

environmental and other activity alongside the services provided by the 

council. 

We will: 

• Develop the Council strategy for its relationship with the voluntary sector, 

recognising the key role fulfilled by the voluntary sector and volunteers to 

cultural life in Hillingdon, identify clear objectives for its support and 

definitions and priorities for the allocation of funding. 

A4: Improve our communication with local communities helping to 

ensure that they have access to information about cultural activities and 

opportunities. 

We will: 

• Review current service publicity and publications to assess how effective 

they are in providing information and promoting wider cultural 

participation. 

• Establish a cultural marketing and promotion plan with a budget. 

• Investigate the re-introduction of a regular listing of cultural activities and 

events 

• Ensure better service webpages, web-sites, enable free access to the 

Internet for cultural information, including provision for feedback from 

users. 

A5: Ensure that culture improves life opportunities for all sections of 

our community including working with partners in education, health and 

other sectors to improve personal and community opportunities and wellbeing. 

We will: 

• Develop and provide a range of life and skills opportunities within the 

cultural sector 

• Promote healthy living and encourage the adoption of active life-styles 

through cultural provision and activities. 



B. HILLINGDON SPACES AND PLACES 

Hillingdon’s spaces and places, its natural and built environment and its cultural 

places must also be at the heart of the cultural strategy. Hillingdon is a very green 

borough with the second largest area of green belt of all London boroughs. Our open 

space is one of our most important assets, including our 165 parks. We also benefit 

from four woodlands that are national nature reserves, two country parks and 

important waterways including the Grand Union Canal and the River Colne. 

The quality of our built environment is also important. Our cultural facilities including 

our libraries, leisure centres, swimming pools, theatres and art centres, youth and 

community centres are a focus for individual expression and community activity. 

Pressures on resources mean the continual review and re-prioritising of the 

development and refurbishment of facilities to meet new and growing cultural needs. 

Our town centres are places not just for shopping but also for socialising and 

community activity. All have their distinctive character and some are already 

developing local street activities. 

We also need to preserve and restore our built heritage particularly places like the 

Manor Farm site and Barra Hall and Park which offer so much to the local 

community. 

All these spaces and places are important in the lives of the community and the 

Cultural Strategy must seek a sustainable way to ensure that all parts of the 

community benefit from them. In particular the needs of children and young people 

for play and exciting and enjoyable recreational activity, including music and media 

projects, should be recognised if we are to help lay the foundations for the healthy 

and lively Hillingdon community of the future. 

Aims 

Hillingdon’s spaces and cultural facilities are important to the quality of life of all its 

residents and visitors and the Cultural Strategy should help ensure that: 

• We make the most of and improve access to our green spaces and natural 

environment ensuring that we preserve it for future generations to enjoy 

• We maintain and improve the quality of cultural facilities taking care to see 

that they meet the needs of all sections of the community 

• We help make our public spaces and places attractive and safe for use by all 

the community. 

• We ensure that we protect and enhance access to and appreciation of our 

built heritage 

Priorities 

Our priorities for the Cultural Strategy are to: 

B1: Widen access to and enhance the opportunities to benefit from 

Hillingdon’s cultural spaces and places so that everyone can enjoy Hillingdon’s 

considerable assets. 



We will: 

• Revise the Sports and Recreation strategy bringing together Leisure 

Facilities, Green Spaces, Sports Development, schools, Uxbridge College 

and Brunel University and the sports voluntary sector to maximise the 

sports opportunities both indoor and outdoor in Hillingdon. 

• Develop an Arts strategy that encompasses the work being undertaken in 

the Best Value Review, the need for community arts development and 

work with partners within Hillingdon and West London. 

• Promote interest in green spaces and public spaces through engaging 

local people in initiatives such Minet Country Park and a street arts 

festival. Support Town Centre Managers and work with community safety 

groups and the private sector to enliven town centres and make them 

safe and attractive places for everyone. 

• Enable personal engagement with our history by developing public 

access to the rich collection of archives and artefacts in partnership with 

Brunel University and other local partners. 

B2: Work to improve the quality and range of cultural facilities available to 

our residents and try to ensure that we can respond in relevant and exciting ways to 

changing and developing needs for cultural expression and creativity. 

We will: 

• Support the Education, Youth & Leisure Asset Management Review plan 

for new leisure provision, the opportunities to refurbish and renew 

Hillingdon's libraries, and plans for enhanced Adult Education facilities to 

revitalise Hillingdon's cultural and lifelong learning facilities. 

• Initiate a strategic review of new cultural facility provision with our 

partners within the borough including schools, Uxbridge College and 

Brunel University and with neighbouring boroughs to ensure that we 

maximise the potential benefits to residents and visitors. 

B3: Ensure we provide a range of appropriate facilities for children and 

young people that are attractive to them and that we create safe environments for 

children and young people, particularly those who may feel excluded from use for 

whatever reason. 

We will: 

• Work with Youth Services to deliver the Youth Plan and seek to maximise 

links with cultural activities and providers in meeting the cultural and 

development needs of young people 

• Work with the Green Spaces team and other agencies to support the 

development of play provision and conservation activities for young 

people. 



B4: Support initiatives to preserve and enhance our natural and built 

heritage seeking to maximise community access to and appreciation of our heritage 

whilst preserving it for future generations. 

We will: 

• Work with partners to develop a borough wide approach to supporting the 

built and natural environment to ensure we speak with a single voice to 

funding and other supporting agencies. 

• Support applications to heritage bodies for the restoration and conservation of 

key facilities like the Manor Farm Site, Ruislip Woodlands and the Lido, Barra 

Hall and Park, open spaces and canal path developments. 

C: HILLINGDON PARTNERS 

Very few of the priorities identified in this strategy could progress without close 

working with many departments in the Council as well as organisations and agencies 

outside the Council. The Council is not an island. Through the Hillingdon Strategic 

Partnership and the Hillingdon Community Plan it is already working with a wide 

range of organisations to improve life in the borough for everyone. Through the 

cultural strategy we need to explore with our partners how we can together further 

improve the community’s quality of life. 

Neither is our borough an island. Hillingdon is part of a World City and centre of 

creativity as well as a European capital, and home to Heathrow Airport - a physical 

and symbolic link to the rest of the world and its diverse cultures. Hillingdon is also 

home to many international companies and has excellent transport links with the rest 

of London. 

Hillingdon is a great place to live and work and it has a vision of its place in the future 

set out in its Community Plan. If the Cultural Strategy is to be effective it must 

encourage and promote collaborative work with partners both within and outside the 

borough boundaries. 

Aims 

Partnership will be critical to the success of initiatives to improve cultural life in the 

borough and our Cultural Strategy should help ensure that: 

• We maximise the linkages between the Cultural Strategy and the Community 

Plan and other key strategies in education, economic and urban development, 

health, community safety and the environment showing how cultural activities 

can make a significant contribution in all these areas. 

• We maximise resources, physical, financial and human for cultural 

development through partnerships both within and outside the borough to 

provide the highest quality cultural experience for our residents and visitors. 



Priorities 

Our priorities for the cultural strategy are to: 

C1: Work with other cultural providers to help deliver the Cultural Strategy’s 

priorities and to ensure a high profile for cultural development to help meet quality 

of life objectives for the borough 

We will: 

• Develop a Cultural Strategy Group of service representatives and partners to 

monitor and develop the Strategy. 

• Ensure the linking of the Cultural Strategy to the development of the 

Community Plan. 

C2: Extend working links between cultural providers and services and 

education, youth, health, community, environmental and other agencies to 

ensure that culture can play its full role in individual and community development. 

We will: 

• Initiate a series of bi-lateral and group meetings with key partners to assess 

current linkages between their programmes and to develop ways in which 

cultural activity can help meet their social and community objectives. 

• Work with sub-regional and regional partners to maximise benefits for 

provision in Hillingdon. 

C3: Enhance the community role of cultural facilities as key points for contact, 

information and communication as well as spaces enabling enjoyment and access to 

a range of leisure, educational, entertainment and cultural activities. 

We will: 

• Explore ways in which the cultural facilities in the borough could provide 

access for the community to a wider range of information and inter-action with 

the Council, in partnership with other services. 



HILLINGDON LOCAL CULTURAL STRATEGY APPENDIX 2 

ACTION PLAN 

DRAFT 

A1 

Theme: Hillingdon People 

Priority Actions Partners Outputs Timescale 

Ensure better access 

Within Year 

for all 

1 

Identify a range of routes and 

facilitators for finding out the needs 

and interests of groups and 

communities not fully benefiting 

from cultural provision and develop 

a targeted programme to respond 

to these needs. 

Ensure that Cultural Services work 

to remove, whenever possible, any 

barriers to children, young people 

and adults accessing services, 

including the appropriate use of 

new technology. 

Cultural Services 

Connecting 

Communities 

EMASS 

Community groups 

Hillingdon Music Service 

Specific voluntary 

organisations 


EYL IT (HGfl) 


CIT 

Representative planning group 

formed and first targeted 

programme developed 

Programme delivered. 

Second and third programmes 

devised and delivered 

Outcomes include : 

Service membership requirements 

simplified 

Strategy for fees and charges in 

place 

Years 2 - 3 

Year 1 and 

on-going 

Ensure services have access to up 

to date socio-economic information 

and regular corporate market 

research which covers the cultural 

needs and aspirations of the 

community and more effective 

integrated use is made of data 

already held . 


Chief Execs -Information 

& Intelligence 

Consultation 

Other council services 

Pilot automatic library membership 

with HGfl and work towards use of 

smartcard 

Plans supported with ACORN data 

and integrated use of service data 

Market research programme 

agreed and implemented 

Officers trained in community 

profiling 

Year 1,2&3 

Year 1 and 

on-going 



A2 

A3 


Work across services, with schools 

Planning group formed. First joint Within Year 

and other education providers and 

programme finalised and 

1 

with community groups to develop 

implemented 

cultural projects and activities that 

celebrate and reflect diversity and 

On-going programmes planned & Years 2 - 3 

enable creative expression. 

implemented 

Promote cultural activity 

that celebrates diverse 

communities 

Work positively with 

voluntary sector and 

local organisations 

Develop the corporate Council 

strategy for its on-going relationship 

and support with the voluntary 

sector. 



SIS/schools 

Adult Education 

Youth Service 

Community cultural 

providers 

Healthy Hillingdon 

Community Resources 

team 

Voluntary sector 

HAVS 

Mapping exercise of cultural activity 

in Hillingdon completed by the 

group 

Corporate Audits of internal 

funding/support provided to the 

voluntary sector, and of voluntary 

sector in Hillingdon, in partnership 

with HAVS, completed 

Within Year 

1 

Corporate Strategy developed and 

agreed. 

Year 1/2 

A4 

Improve our 

communication with 

local communities 

Review current service publicity and 

promotions to assess how effective 

they are in providing information 

and promoting wider cultural 

participation. 

Arts Service, Leisure 

Service 

Sports Development 

Youth Service 

Green Spaces 

As above 


Green Spaces team 

Other cultural providers 


providers 

HGfl 

Advice and help provided to 

voluntary sector on accessing 

external funding 

Develop service networking with 

HAVS to publicise capacity 

building, good practice training 

opportunities 

Cultural marketing and promotion 

group formed Review completed 

On-going 

Year 1 and 

on-going 

Within Year 

1 



A4 


Establish a cultural marketing and Cultural Services 

Within Year 

promotion plan with a budget. Green Spaces 

1 

Improve our 

communication with 

local communities . 

Investigate the re-introduction of a 

regular listing of cultural activities 

and events provided through 

services/cultural community. 

Marketing and promotion 

team 

External partners 

Marketing and promotion plan 

developed including service data 

and new data from priority A1 

Sponsor/external partner sought. 

Bid for p/t post to coordinate. 

Publication programme agreed 

Year 1,2,3 

By Year 3 

A4 Ensure better service webpages, 

free access to the Internet for 

cultural information, including 

provision for feedback from users. 

A5 

Ensure that culture 

improves life 

opportunities and 

enables active lifestyles 

for all sections of our 

community 

Develop and provide a range of life 

and skills opportunities within the 

cultural sector 



Green Spaces 

HGfl 

Horizon 

CIT 


Youth Service 


SIS,& schools 

Brunel and other 

education providers 

Music Service 



providers 

Programme of designated service 

information and publicity points 

completed for all cultural venues, 

theatres, leisure centres, youth 

centres, libraries, adult education 

centres 

Content and design Web 

information improved. Links from all 

service web pages. 

Free Internet access from cultural 

venues as well as libraries. 

Service and Cross-service/partner 

opportunities planned and 

provided. To Include e.g.: 

IT skills, work placements, 

arts/theatre experience/training, 

life-guard training, career 

development information through 

links to Connexions. MA 

courses(leisure). 

Programme developed 

Years ! & 2 

Year 3 




A5 Promote healthy living and 

encourage the adoption of active 

life-styles through cultural 

provision and activities. 



Green Spaces 

Community 

organisations 

Social Services 

Cross-service programme for 

older people developed. and 

delivered 

Inter -generational project 

planned and delivered 

Year 2 

By Year 3 

Years 1-3 

Programme developed by 

services over 3 year period. 

To include 

GP Referral 

Fitness provision 

Sport in Parks 

Health Fair 

Writing/reading groups 

Walks programme 



B1 

Theme: Hillingdon Spaces & Places 


Widen access to and 

Strategy developed and agreed Within Year 1 

benefit from Hillingdon’s 

cultural spaces and 

places 

Revise the Sports and Recreation 

strategy bringing together Leisure 

Facilities, Green Spaces, Sports 

Development, schools, Uxbridge 

College and Brunel University and 

the sports voluntary sector to 

maximise the sports opportunities 

both indoor and outdoor in 

Hillingdon. 

Leisure Service 


Schools 

Brunel University, 


Sports voluntary sector 

West London providers 

B1 Develop the Arts strategy Arts Service 

Brunel University 

Schools 

Community partners 

West London partners 

Service partners 

B1 Promote interest in green spaces 

and public spaces through 

engaging with local people in 

initiatives such Minet Country Park 

and a street arts festival. Support 

Town Centre Managers and work 

with community safety groups and 

the private sector to enliven town 

centres and make them safe and 

attractive places for everyone. 


Arts Service 


Town Centre managers 

and Town Centre groups 

Community Safety Team 

Community groups 

Schools 

Strategy implemented 

Strategy developed and agreed 

Strategy implemented 

Collaborative programme 

developed by year 3 to include 

Events in Parks programme 

(Green Spaces strategy) 

Medieval Festival at Manor Farm 

Uxbridge Street Arts Festival 

Years 2 & 3 

Year 1 /2 

Years 2/3 

By year 3 

B1 Enable personal engagement with 

our history by developing public 

access to the rich collection of 

archives and artefacts in 

partnership with Brunel University 

Library Service 


Local Studies and 

Family History Groups 

Hillingdon Race Equality 

'Bridging the gap' oral history 

project completed, with travelling 

exhibition. 

(If HLF bid successful) 'Heritage 

Year 1 





and other local partners. 

Council 

Schools 

builds bridges' joint project makes 

archives accessible on-line and 

digitised on HGfl 

Year 1 to 3 

B2 

Work to improve the 

quality and range of 

cultural facilities 

Ensure we provide a 

range of appropriate 

facilities for children and 

young people 

Support the Education, Youth & 

Leisure Asset Management 

Review plan for new leisure 

provision, the opportunities to 

refurbish and renew Hillingdon's 

libraries, and plans for enhanced 

Adult Education and Youth Service 

facilities to revitalise Hillingdon's 

cultural and lifelong learning 

facilities. 

Initiate a strategic review of new 

cultural facility provision with our 

partners within the borough 

including schools, Uxbridge 

College and Brunel University and 

with neighbouring boroughs to 

ensure that we maximise the 

potential benefits to residents and 

visitors. 

Work with Youth Services to 

support the delivery of the Youth 

Plan and seek to maximise links 

with cultural activities and 

providers in meeting the cultural 

and development needs of young 

people. 


Schools 



Youth Service 


Property Services 


Schools 



Private providers 

Neighbouring Boroughs 

Property Services 


Youth Service 

Work progressed with partners 

towards a borough museum 

Progress made in providing 

accessible, attractive, 'fit for 

purpose' cultural and lifelong 

learning facilities for Hillingdon 

Years 1-3 

Years 1-3 

Strategic review completed End year 2 

Best Value Review action plan for 

review of Compass Theatre in 

partnership with youth service and 

other agencies completed 

Joint project to deliver mystery 

shopper programme to enable 

Year 1 





young people scrutinising the 

delivery of services. 

Plan developed for promoting 

services and events through 

schools 

B3 Work with the Green Spaces team 

and other agencies to support the 

development of play provision, and 

conservation activities for young 

people. 


Youth Services 


On-going action plan developed Year 2 & 3 

Green Spaces strategy supported Year 1 

and on-going 

B4 

Preserve and enhance 

natural and built heritage 

Continue to contribute to a 

borough wide approach to 

supporting the built and natural 

environment to ensure we speak 

with a single voice to funding and 

other supporting agencies. 


Environment Services 

Voluntary sector 

External Funding officer 

Common approach agreed with 

regular review and liaison process 

Year 1 

and on-going 

Support projects to restore and 

conserve Hillingdon's built and 

natural heritage such as the Manor 

Farm Site, Ruislip Woodlands and 

the Lido, Barra Hall and park etc, 

to enable greater public access 

and interpretation. 



Community support 

groups 

Schools 

External funding achieved to 

enable major projects to proceed 

within the timescale of the 

strategy 

Link to Priority A4 to develop 

publicity and promotion of 

Hillingdon's heritage 

Years 1 to 3 

By year 2 



C1 

C2 

C3 

Theme: Hillingdon Partners 


Work with other cultural Develop a Cultural Strategy Group Cultural Services, other Strategy regularly reviewed and Year 1 to 3 

providers to help deliver of service representatives and key partners 

monitored 

the Cultural Strategy’s partners to monitor and develop the 

priorities and to ensure strategy. 

a high profile for 

Years 1 to 3 

cultural development to Ensure the linkage of the Cultural Local Strategic 

Cultural Strategy themes and 

help meet quality of life Strategy to the development of the Partnership 

activities adopted through the 

objectives for the Community Plan. 

Lifelong 

planning process for inclusion in 

borough 

Learning/Cultural the Community Plan.. 

Extend working links 

with other 

services/agencies 

Enhance community 

role of cultural facilities 

Initiate a series of bi-lateral and 

group meetings with key partners to 

assess current linkages between 

their programmes and to develop 

ways in which cultural activity can 

help meet their social and 

community objectives. 

Work with sub-regional and regional 

partners to maximise benefits for 

provision in Hillingdon. 

Explore ways in which the cultural 

facilities in the borough could 

provide access for the community 

to a wider range of information and 

inter-action with the Council, in 

partnership with other services. 

. 

Development Group 


Wide range of other 

agencies and services 



HIP Customer contact 

project team 

Corporate IT 

HGfl 

Other Council Services 

On-going discussion process and 

the implementation of joint working 

on projects 

Development projects within 

Westwords, (Literature),WELIC for 

Libraries, Western Wedge for Arts, 

London West LSC, London 

Libraries Development Agency 

identified and delivered 

Feasibility started for First Stop 

access t o the Council for the 

community and the use of cultural 

facilities as community base for 

other services. 

If agreed, schemes progressed 

and delivered 

Years 1 - 3 

Years 1 to 3 

Year 1 

Years 2 & 3 



A REVIEW OF THE ANIMAL WELFARE CHARTER ITEM 5 

SUMMARY 

Contact Officer: Peggy Law 

Telephone: 01895 277403 

The report details a review of the Animal Welfare Charter summarising progress and 

achievements made since its endorsement in 2001. The report also includes some 

proposed amendments to the Charter and a summary of draft animal welfare 

legislation currently being considered by government. 


That Cabinet: 

1. Notes progress being made since the endorsement of the Charter. 

2. Agrees to the proposed amendments to the Animal Welfare Charter. 

3. Instructs officers to carry out a review of the Charter once the Animal 

Welfare legislation is implemented. 

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION 

To ensure that the Charter is kept under review and to take on board the implications 

of proposed new legislation. 

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS AVAILABLE 

The Cabinet could instruct officers to carry out further work at this stage. 

OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY COMMITTEE COMMENTS 

The Overview & Scrutiny Committee did not ask to comment on the report. 

INFORMATION 

1. The Environment Committee endorsed the Animal Welfare Charter on 2 nd 

October 2001, which is appended to this report. It was agreed that the Charter 

would be reviewed regularly and if necessary revised from time to time to reflect 

changes in legislation and other relevant issues. 

2. The recent review is focussed on three areas as follows: 

• Progress and achievements made since the endorsement of the Charter 

• Amendments to the Charter as a result of policy developments and further 

comments from the RSPCA 

• Recent developments and proposals on animal welfare legislation and the 

Hunting Bill. 



A Review on Progress and Achievements 

3. The following are a summary of the progress and achievements made since the 

endorsement of the Charter: 

• A Local Biodiversity Action Plan is being developed to encourage and protect 

biodiversity in the borough. 

• A general enforcement policy has been developed for enforcement work, which 

includes dealing with unlicensed animal boarding and breeding establishments 

and licence contraventions. It is anticipated that once the proposed Animal 

Welfare Bill becomes an Act, it would enhance local authorities’ role in respect 

of promoting animal welfare through advice, education, inspection, enforcement 

and prosecution. 

• In response to many residents who were experiencing problems with urban 

foxes, general information and detailed practical advice on the use of repellent 

to deter foxes has been made available on Council’s website, Hillingdon People 

and in leaflet form. Further information on responsible dog ownership is to be 

introduced on the website. It is hoped that we could continually build on the 

amount of information and advice available on the website and eventually cover 

all aspects of animal welfare. 

• In order to encourage responsible dog ownership, a publicity campaign 

involving the issuing of penalty notices for littering and dog fouling is being 

planned in conjunction with the police. By consolidating the enforcement 

actions, it makes a more effective use of the resources and sends a clear 

message that such anti-social behaviour is unacceptable. 

• Close liaison has been developed between Animal Control Officers (ACO), 

Entertainment Licensing Officers and Leisure Services to ensure that ACOs are 

informed of all forthcoming events involving animals. Whenever possible, ACOs 

will attend events where live animals are involved to protect the welfare of the 

animals. 

• For the Animal Welfare Charter to be meaningful, it is important to raise public 

awareness on animal welfare issues. It is important to show how the policies in 

the Charter are being implemented in a practical way. To this end, an article is 

being planned in Hillingdon People to illustrate some of the animal welfare 

issues being tackled by our ACOs. 

Proposed Amendments to the Charter 

4. The following relates to comments received from the RSPCA. 

5. In Section 1.2 of the Charter as attached, it is probably more appropriate to use 

the term ‘animal freedom’ rather than ‘animal rights’ which is often associated with 

animal rights activists whereas the intended meaning is associated with animal 

welfare. 

6. In section 1.3 of the Charter, the five basic freedoms were first developed by the 

Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) and have since gained increasing acceptance 



within Government, veterinary and animal welfare groups as the basic principles, 

which should govern the care of all animals. It is suggested that ‘RSPCA’ should be 

replaced with ‘Farm Animal Welfare Council’. 

7. The fifth freedom as stipulated by the FAWC is ‘freedom to express normal 

behaviour’ and not ‘freedom from unnecessary constraint’. 

8. There were other comments made regarding provision of further information and 

clarifications on licensing of pet shops, boarding and breeding establishments, riding 

establishments, training of staff etc. It is felt that such details should not be in the 

Charter but could be made available separately, either as an appendix to the Charter 

or as information leaflets and published on our web site. This area of work will form 

part of the next review. 

9. Other updates relate to Section 1.1 of the Charter, the Animal Control Service 

was not included in the Best Value Review in 2002 and the last sentence should be 

deleted. 

10. In section 2.3 of the Charter, it is suggested that the second action concerning 

biodiversity should be deleted and replaced with the following. ‘A Local Biodiversity 

Action Plan (LBAP) is being produced, which is a plan of action for protecting 

conserving and enhancing wildlife, at a local level. LBAPs focus resources to 

conserve and enhance biodiversity by means of local partnerships, taking account of 

both national priorities, including rare and endangered species, and local priorities 

identified by local communities’. 

Animal Welfare Bill 

11. The Government is proposing to introduce an Animal Welfare Bill that would 

consolidate the existing animal protection legislation. It is widely acknowledged that 

the current laws on animal welfare is fragmented and requires updating. 

The main aims of the bill are: 

• The improvement of the enforcement regime and to promote coherent animal 

welfare policies. 

• Extension of the current licensing arrangements operated by local authorities in 

respect of certain businesses that keep animals as part of their trade, to include 

other types of animal establishment. 

12. The bill may also enhance local authorities’ role in respect of animal health and 

welfare and could include provision of advice, education, inspection, enforcement 

and prosecution. It is recognised that local authorities currently have limited statutory 

responsibility for the enforcement of animal health and welfare legislation. 

13. Once the Animal Welfare Bill becomes an Act, the current scope of the Charter 

may need to be extended to reflect the legislative changes. It may also be necessary 

to re-examine and revise the format of the Charter to ensure that policy statements 

remain clear and given sufficient emphasis. It is therefore proposed that the Charter 

is reviewed and revised once the legislation is implemented. 



Hunting Bill 

14. The Bill remains in limbo following its passage through the Houses of Parliament 

last year. It was amended by the Lords to allow hunting to continue under a 

registration scheme. When the Bill returned to the House of Commons, the 

government put forward a late amendment to the Bill, which would have allowed 

dogs to continue to be used below ground in certain circumstances. Although the Bill 

was left out of the Queen’s Speech in November 2003, assurances were given by 

government that the hunting issue will be resolved in this parliament. 


Finance 

15. The recommendations to agree the amendments and to carry out a review have 

no financial implications. 

Legal 

16. Members should note that at present no direct legal issues arise from the report. 


Animal Welfare Charter 



Animal Welfare Charter 

1.0 The animal welfare charter provides an opportunity for animal welfare issues 

to be promoted and to send a clear message to the community the Council’s 

commitment to animal welfare and its strong opposition to cruelty to animals. 

1.1 This charter identifies a number of areas where the Council can promote and 

bring about improvement in the health and welfare of animals. To ensure that the 

Council delivers on these objectives, an action plan will be drawn up and the 

performance reviewed and assessed on a regular basis. The assessment process 

will be linked to the Council’s Best Value review programme that encourages the use 

of best practice and setting of achievable targets. The Animal Control Service is 

scheduled for Best Value Review in 2002. 

1.2 The animal welfare charter will be reviewed regularly and if necessary revised 

from time to time to reflect changes in legislation and to address local concerns and 

specific topical issues. 

1.3 This charter enshrines the rights of animals to enjoy the five basic freedoms 

as supported by the RSPCA: 

♦ freedom from hunger and thirst 

♦ freedom from discomfort 

♦ freedom from pain, injury or disease 

♦ freedom from fear and distress 

♦ freedom from unnecessary constraint 

These five animal rights will form the guiding principles when formulating council 

policies on animal welfare. The charter intends to raise awareness on welfare of 

animals and has been prepared within the overall framework of our Local Agenda 21 

Strategy and Unitary Development Plan (UDP). 

There are animal welfare groups who campaign against cruelty to animals such as 

the RSPCA, League Against Cruel Sports and many others. This charter will 

concentrate on issues that are directly under the Council’s remit where any action 

taken is more likely to make a real difference. 

Wildlife and habitat conservation 

2.0 The London Borough of Hillingdon has one of the greatest diversity in land 

use compared to other London Boroughs. It has a unique combination of 

environment, being both rural and urban, with a mix of traditional and modern, 

industrial and residential developments. 

Hillingdon has a rich diversity of wildlife habitats and species. There are six Sites of 

Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) within the Borough. The Council has designated 5 

sites within the Borough as Local Nature Reserves and the London Ecological Unit 

has identified a further 11 sites as Sites of Metropolitan Importance for Nature 

Conservation, 42 sites as Sites of Borough Importance and 7 sites as Sites of Local 

Importance. It is the only London Borough with a National Nature Reserve, namely 

Ruislip Wood, which represents 10% of London’s semi-natural ancient woodland. 



Elsewhere in the Borough, the Yeading Valley Park Corridor, the open land adjoining 

Ickenham and Ruislip, and even narrow strips of open land such as the River Pinn 

Corridor and the Grand Union Canal, all link together to form ‘Green Chains’ of open 

land which extend across the Borough boundaries, providing wildlife corridor. 

2.1 Many of the nature sites also contain rich and diverse aquatic wildlife and 

include rivers and watercourses in the Borough such as River Colne, R. Frays, R. 

Pinn and the Grand Union Canal to the west of the Borough and River Crane and 

Yeading Brook to the east. 

As part of our commitment to LA21, it is important to protect, enhance and manage 

these rich habitats, to ensure that plant and animal life thrive in these areas. Local 

bio-diversity should be encouraged and development constrained within the carrying 

capacity of the natural environment. 

2.2 The Council is committed to 

♦ protect and promote the rich diversity of habitats within the borough including the 

sites of special scientific interest, local and other nature reserves 

♦ protect wildlife and maintain bio-diversity in these areas 

♦ seek to create new habitats to attract a variety of wildlife 

2.3 Action 

‣ This is being achieved through land use planning policies in the borough’s 

Unitary Development Plan. The Council will not permit development which would 

adversely affect these habitats and nature conservation as a positive land use is 

actively promoted 

‣ The Greater London Authority (GLA) is due to produce a bio-diversity action plan 

for London. Public consultation will commence in the near future. Once 

published, the plan will form the framework of an action plan for encouraging and 

protecting bio-diversity in the borough 

‣ This area of work overlaps with our Local Agenda 21 Strategy for Hillingdon. This 

strategy is based on our commitment to sustainable development through 

protecting and enhancing the environment. The strategy seeks to ensure that the 

natural environment, (including the urban natural environment) in the borough is 

conserved and enhanced. 

Improve animal welfare through inspection, licensing and enforcement 

3.0 Improvement and protection of animal welfare could be achieved by effective 

enforcement of licensing conditions. Local authorities have the power under a 

number of legislation to licence pet shops, breeding and boarding establishments, 

riding establishments, zoos and dangerous wild animals. 

3.1 Under the Pet Animals Act 1951, pet shops have to be licensed by local 

authorities to ensure that the welfare of the animals is protected. Problems that may 

occur in some pet shops include overcrowding of animals, lack of adequate exercise, 

lack of proper supervision, inadequate diet, poor hygiene and lack of trained staff. 



The Council discourages the selling of pets without proper regard to the welfare 

needs of the animal. 

3.2 The Breeding of Dogs Act 1973 and Animal Boarding Establishments Act 

1963 require these premises to be properly managed having regard to the conditions 

of the accommodation and the welfare of the animals in these establishments. The 

Breeding of Dogs Act 1991 gives local authority power of entry to unlicensed dog 

breeding establishments, allowing officers and vets to seek a warrant to inspect 

unlicensed premises. 

3.3 In addition to maintaining and improving the welfare of animals in these 

premises, a significant number of animals also pass through Heathrow Airport. It is 

one of the main routes by which live animals are imported into this country through 

the Airport’s Live Animal Border Inspection Post. The UK has adopted the 

International Air Transport Association’s Live Animal Regulations, which stipulate 

conditions to ensure that proper welfare standards are monitored and met. The 

Council will continue working in partnership with City of London Corporation to 

ensure that the regulations are rigorously enforced and animal welfare standards are 

maintained. 

3.4 The Council has an important role to play in preventing cruelty to animals 

through enforcement. The present legislation on cruelty to animals is based on the 

Protection of Animal Act 1911. This has been reinforced over the years by other Acts 

of Parliament and by statutory regulations. Some parts of the legislation apply only to 

dogs, whilst other parts apply to other domestic animals and wildlife. The Council will 

assist and work in partnership with RSPCA to investigate and whenever possible 

prosecute those who perform acts of cruelty to animals. 

3.5 The Council will 

♦ undertake animal welfare inspections to ensure that licensing conditions are met 

so as to secure the health and welfare of animals in pet shops, in boarding and 

breeding establishments. These conditions would seek to ensure such measures 

as suitable accommodation, adequate food and drink, precautions to prevent the 

spread of disease and suitable emergency procedures. 

♦ promote responsible ownership of exotic pets through licensing conditions. 

Many of the animals are also listed under the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 

♦ in conjunction with veterinary officers, continue to ensure that horse-riding 

establishments comply with licensing conditions. Under the Riding 

Establishments Act 1964, there is a requirement for riding establishment to be 

licensed and regular inspections carried out by a veterinary surgeon. 

♦ take enforcement action to counter unlicensed premises and contravention of 

licence conditions 



♦ continue our partnership with City of London Corporation to ensure that proper 

health and welfare standards of all animals imported through Heathrow Airport’s 

Live Animal Border Inspection Post are maintained 

♦ The Council will assist and work in partnership with RSPCA to investigate and 

whenever possible prosecute those who perform acts of cruelty to animals 

3.6 Action 

‣ Review and consolidate existing licensing conditions on pet shops, boarding, 

breeding and riding establishments to ensure they meet animal welfare needs. 

‣ Develop a robust enforcement policy to deal with unlicensed premises and 

licence contraventions 

Provision of Animal Control Service 

4.0 One of the key functions of the Animal Control Service is to collect stray dogs 

and ensure that they are treated in a humane manner and are not subjected to any 

further stress or discomfort. On average, the Council collects about 20 stray dogs 

per week. Our aim is to actively promote responsible dog ownership and to reduce 

the number of stray dogs in the Borough. As part of our campaign, the Council aims 

to provide an information pack to raise public awareness on the benefits of 

mircochipping and the neutering of cats and dogs. Pet ownership is a partnership 

that combines pleasure with responsibility. 

4.1 The Council currently provides a microchip implant service for pets and is 

being publicised in pet shops and public places. Each microchip is given a unique 

number, which is linked to a national microchip identification database. The system 

is one of the quickest ways of returning any lost animal back to its owner. 

4.2 The Animal Control Officers also ensure that all reported injured or sick 

animals and wildlife receive proper treatment and that they are relieved of any pain 

and suffering as soon as practicable. Complaints of cruelty to domesticated animals; 

wildlife and exotic species within the Borough are always thoroughly investigated in 

conjunction with RSPCA and other welfare organisations with a view to possible 

prosecutions. 

4.3 The Animal Control Service also plays an important part in providing advice 

and support to members of the public on aspects of less common species of animals 

such as the removal and re-siting of poisonous adder snakes from sensitive areas to 

safe areas. Officers will work with the relevant organisations to protect badgers from 

disturbance and interference. Practical support is also given to other departments of 

the Council and agencies on evictions involving animals and transport of live 

animals. 


♦ continue to fund and operate a animal control service incorporating animal 

welfare as a key element of the service 



♦ actively encourage responsible dog ownership by producing an information pact 

to raise public awareness 

♦ continue to fulfil our legal obligation on the collection and kennelling of stray dogs 

in the borough 

♦ enforce against owners of dogs who fail to clear up after their dogs 

♦ provide advice on all aspects of animal welfare 

♦ continue to provide microchip implant service for animals 

♦ provide support for removal of animals when evictions are carried out 

♦ promote responsible pet ownership by enforcement and raising public awareness 

4.5 Action 

‣ Publicise the microchip implant service by distribution of leaflets and public 

awareness campaigns 

‣ Introduce initiatives to promote animal welfare and responsible dog ownership. 

Advice and information on animal welfare to be made more accessible to the 

public via the internet 

‣ Produce an information pack to encourage responsible pet ownership and 

highlight the importance of the following: 

a) Microhipping 

b) Neutering of cats and dogs 

c) Meeting the welfare needs of the animals 

d) Social responsibilities such as keeping dogs under control in public places, 

clean up after their dogs and making sure that they do not cause a noise 

nuisance to neighbours by persistent barking 

Influence the use of Council land for events to ensure good animal welfare 

practice 

5.0 As landowners, local authorities have the power to refuse permission for 

certain activities to take place on their land. These activities include hunting with 

dogs, animal circuses, tethering of horses and ponies and giving animal prizes. 

Hunting with dogs include a range of activities such as fox hunting, stag hunting and 

hare coursing. In hare coursing, beagles or harriers are used to chase the hare and 

the aim is not to kill the hare – although some are caught and killed, but to test the 

speed and agility of the dogs. 

5.1 Hunting with dogs is considered by many, including the RSPCA and other 

animal welfare organisations, to be cruel. A number of options are currently being 

considered by Government, which includes a complete ban on hunting with dogs, or 

allow only licensed events. The Youth and Leisure Sub-Committee in 1999 

supported a ban on activities relating to hunting with dogs at all future Middlesex 

Country Show which takes place annually in the Borough. 

5.2 In respect of animal circuses, the Leisure Sub-Committee on 10 October 1995 

reviewed the policy on the letting of Council owned sites to circuses. The committee 

resolved that sites be let only to circuses which are members of the Association of 

Circus Proprietors and that do not include live animal acts in their programmes. 



5.3 The Council will enforce the Protection Against Cruel Tethering Act 1988 and 

will not allow tethering of horses and ponies as a method of keeping equines on a 

permanent basis when there is no regular daily exercise. If tethering is temporary or 

regular daily exercise is provided then Code of Practice for tethering horses and 

ponies should be followed. 


♦ ensure that where animals are involved in public display or performances, their 

welfare and conditions are inspected and regulated 

♦ ban animal circuses from council owned sites where it is legal to do so and it is 

supported by local interested groups 

♦ enforce the Protection Against Cruel Tethering Act 1988 

♦ discourage animals being given as prizes usually with little or no preparation for 

the welfare needs of the animal 

♦ oppose the use of all snares and traps to control pests which would cause 

unnecessary suffering 

5.5 Action 

‣ Closer liaison with entertainment licensing officers and leisure services to ensure 

that events involving performing animals are monitored 

‣ Review current policies on the use of Council land for events involving animals. 

Where it is lawful to do so, incorporate relevant policies to protect the welfare of 

animals 

Ensure that animal welfare is considered in Council policies when carrying out 

its functions either as service provider or as purchaser of goods and services 


♦ ensure that all pest control treatments are carried out humanely and by trained 

and experienced operatives 

♦ introduce animal welfare measures into council emergency plans 



HILLINGDON BOROUGH TRANSPORT 

STRATEGY: RESPONSE TO THE PRELIMINARY 

CONSULTATION 

ITEM 6 

Contact Officers: Janet Rangeley/Veronica Pinto 

Telephone: 01895 250553/01895 250000 ext 2449 

SUMMARY 

Since July 2003, officers have been developing the Borough Transport Strategy. Part 

of this has included undertaking preliminary consultations with a diversity of 

organisations and individuals within the Borough’s business and residential 

community to assist in the identification of the key issues affecting the community 

and the priorities for the strategy’s action plan. This report provides Cabinet with 

details of the outcomes of the preliminary consultations and informs members of the 

next stages and timetable for progressing towards the target date for adoption of 

June/July2004. 


That Cabinet: 

(a) Agrees the contents of the report, 

(b) approves the timetable for the next stages in preparing the Borough 

Transport Strategy as detailed in paragraph 14 of the report, and 

(c) requests officers to bring the draft Borough Transport Strategy to the next 

meeting of Cabinet for consideration for formal consultation purposes. 

REASON FOR OFFICER RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Borough Transport Strategy will provide:- 

• an essential framework for the Council’s Borough Spending Plan, 

• a contribution to the emerging Local Development Framework, and 

• a significant component to implementing the Council’s Community Plan. As 

such, it has been included as a medium term objective in the Leader’s 

Statement and a target date of June/July 2004 set for the adoption of the 

Strategy. 

In order to meet this timescale and for Cabinet to gain an appreciation of the issues, 

as identified by the Borough’s community prior to considering the draft Transport 

Strategy officers, have submitted this report for consideration. 


There are none. 



OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMENT 

This Cabinet report on the response to the preliminary consultation will be on the 

agenda for the proposed Overview and Scrutiny meeting of 1sr March and any 

comments will be reported to the Cabinet meeting on 4 th March. 

INFORMATION 

1. In May/June 2003, work commenced on preparing Hillingdon’s Borough 

Transport Strategy (BTS). Two officer working groups have been established to 

ensure that the strategy is both a corporate document and also provides the 

framework for the future bids within the Council’s Annual Borough Spending Plan 

submission. 

(a) a representative Internal Working Group comprising of Council officers meets 

regularly to provide input on detailed transport issues into the Strategy, 

including parking, air quality, cycling, road safety, planning, traffic management, 

etc. Secondly, and in conjunction with this, a Corporate Steering Group has 

been established to ensure that the different issues such as health, education 

and air quality are integrated into the Strategy, and 

(b) practical issues highlighted by the Internal Working Group are considered by 

corporate heads, local-strategic partners and stakeholders such as HAVS 

(Hillingdon Association of Voluntary Services) and Healthy Hillingdon and taken 

forward into the various themes of the emerging strategy. 

2. Both these groups have been instrumental in developing the preliminary 

consultation for the Transport Strategy, which is detailed in paragraphs 2 to 13 of this 

report. The strategy once adopted will contribute to the Council’s Local 

Implementation Plan for Transport - a requirement of Local Authorities by Central 

Government. 

Preliminary Consultation 

3. The overarching themes of the Transport Strategy are to be based on the 

Community Plan objectives. In order to establish the key issues facing the borough’s 

business and residential community, a period of preliminary consultation has been 

undertaken between June 2003 and January 2004. The outcome of this consultation 

is detailed in the report and the key issues, concerns and comments raised have 

enabled priorities to be identified in developing the Strategy. Many of the local details 

(topic and location) are being considered as officers prepare the transport action 

plan which is the implementation element of the Strategy. 

4. In developing the Hillingdon Transport Strategy, extensive public consultation has 

been conducted to reach as many stakeholders as possible. Briefly, consultation 

exercises have involved: 

• Stakeholder meetings undertaken with key groups, including the Hayes Town 

Partnership, Uxbridge Initiative, the Hillingdon Cycling Working Group, 



Hillingdon Chamber of Commerce and DASH in the Borough initiated the 

consultation process. 

• Public Consultation with Borough residents and tenants associations (see 

Appendix 1. 

• An Internet questionnaire linked to an article in ‘Hillingdon People’. 

• A very successful Borough Transport Conference in November 2003 with a 

cross representation of interests (see Appendix 2) 

• Presentations made to the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee 

which has the Borough Transport Strategy as part of its work programme for 

2003/04. 

5. On the 24 th November 2003, the Borough hosted its first conference on transport 

in Hillingdon. Nearly 100 delegates represented transport users and operators and 

included Transport for London, Healthy Hillingdon and Primary Care Trust (PCT), the 

Disablement Association of Hillingdon (DASH), Hillingdon Carers, Metropolitan 

Police, BME groups, London Cycling Campaign, HAVS, the Uxbridge Initiative, BAA 

and other local businesses. Comments and issues arising from the earlier 

preliminary consultations with some of the key stakeholders held June – September 

2003, were instrumental in developing the themes and workshops at the Conference. 

Presentations were given on:- 

• the need for and the context to the Borough Transport Strategy; 

• the participation process for developing the Strategy. 

• freight 

• mobility 

• Green Travel Plans 

• Safer Routes to School, and 

• Health. 

6. These were followed by five workshops on the following themes:- 

• Air quality and transportation 

• Business 

• General accessibility issues 

• Parking 

• Public transport 

7. Details of the outcomes from the various workshops are contained in Appendix 3, 

but the main issues focused on:- 

• local flexibility of the parking standards, 

• better enforcement of parking regulations particularly along bus lanes and at 

bus stops to allow the free flow of traffic. 

• Costly parking fees, including those for London Underground. 



• Promote park and ride (for local commuters) as it could be effective 

• Parking controls (particularly Parking Management Areas for residential areas) 

and enforcement 

• Local bus services successful especially at Hayes, but poor links north-south. 

• Need for schools to plan for public transport access to them and encourage 

school travel plans. 

• Need for improvements to public transport for disabled people, the elderly and 

young families 

• Need to promote clean vehicles 

• Better integration of the transport system, encouraging the use of canals and 

waterways. 

• Concentrate on local transport initiatives 

• Undertake disability audit and set up a mobility forum 

• Improved design of disabled persons parking spaces 

• Better public transport information and access to it 

• Encourage green travel plans for local businesses 

• 20mph zones (home zones) to be identified 

• need for a heavy commercial vehicles strategy to deal with problems of freight 

on Hillingdon’s roads 

• freight vehicles in bus lanes contribute to congestion 

• public transport linkages to the west (into the Counties) need to be improved. 

8. Overall, the feedback from the Borough Transport Conference has been very 

positive. Many key issues have been identified and discussed and will be invaluable 

in developing the Transport Strategy. The Conference was successful as a platform 

for engaging stakeholders in developing the Transport Strategy and many delegates 

have expressed an interest in further transport discussion forums as the strategy 

emerges. Officers are currently considering the detailed outcome from the various 

workshops and other consultations 

Stakeholder Consultation 

9. A range of interest groups, residents associations and individuals has been 

consulted on the Borough Transport Strategy. More recently officers have been able 

to consult those groups who were unable to attend the Conference. This has 

included a presentation to the Connecting Communities Consortium, the translation 

of the Transport Strategy website questionnaire into minority languages and a link to 

the Transport Strategy website in the HAVS website which will enable responses to 

the Strategy questionnaire from minority groups. In December 2003, officers 

contributed to the motorists’ forum now established and will be considering how 

issues raised at the first and subsequent meetings can be incorporated into the 

emerging strategy. Further consultation involves officers making a presentation and 

holding a discussion session at the Hillingdon Youth Council Conference and the 

Joint Strategy Group for Physical and Sensory Disabilities in February 2004 and are 

currently investigating involvement in the Voluntary Services Health and Social 

Carers Forum, the Disability Forum and the Older Persons Assembly. 



Local Residents Groups / Associations 

10. The consultant commissioned to assist in the consultation part of developing the 

strategy has met with various local tenants and residents associations (see Appendix 

1 to this report) and will complete this work by the end of January. Cabinet should 

note that the list is not comprehensive as it reflects only those groups which 

responded to the invitation from the consultant to attend their meetings to consult on 

the Borough Transport Strategy. Officers are keen to extend this consultation to 

other residents’ associations and local groups during the formal consultation period 

proposed for mid April to late May In a structured approach, the consultant sought 

views on the following six overall objectives: 

• To improve safety 

• To improve health and the general quality of life in local streets 

• To improve the overall reliability of the transport system 

• To improve access to transport 

• To promote economic regeneration and support local business 

• To encourage greater use of public transport, cycling and walking 

• To achieve greater understanding of the issues and greater consensus on the 

way forward 

11. The key findings from this consultation exercise include:- 

• the need to improve safety through accident reduction and enforcement of lower 

speeds, 

• improve reliability of and access to public transport, 

• the provision of short term parking to support local shops, and 

• the opposition to cycle lanes. 

Questionnaires 

12. The local community and interest groups have been able to provide comments 

on transport in Hillingdon via an on-line questionnaire and a similar hard-copy 

questionnaire, in connection with the first in a series of articles in Hillingdon People 

(October/November 2003 issue). 77 responses were received on-line and 16 people 

completed the hard-copy questionnaire. Although not a statistically valid sample, to 

date, the questionnaires have provided a useful insight into the public view of 

transport in Hillingdon. Respondents rated the public transport in the Borough as 

average and commented on the bus and tube services, lack of good north-south 

links, and the continuity and reliability of the public transport service. 

13. From the questionnaire analysis, four key challenges / issues facing those 

travelling in the Borough were identified as: 

• Congestion; 

• Need to improve the public transport system; 

• Traffic calming / safety; and 

• Parking and related issues 



14. The most frequently raised issues included: 

• The continued promotion of walking and cycling initiatives 

• The provision of cheap all-day car parks 

• Regard for motorists 

• West London Tram 

15. Together with the analysis of consultation responses from local residents 

associations, a summary of which will be included in the next issue of Hillingdon 

People (February/March 2004), the feedback from questionnaires will be considered 

as part of the emerging Borough Transport Strategy. Further responses to the 

Strategy questionnaire are expected in the future as a link to the questionnaire is 

currently available on the HAVS website. 

Transport Operators 

16. Officers are due to seek views/discuss the transport strategy with transport 

operators and will be integrating comments and operator priorities into the emerging 

strategy for further consideration. 

Next Stages 

17. As indicated in the paragraph containing the reason for the officer 

recommendations in this report, there is a commitment to achieve the adoption of the 

Borough Transport Strategy by June/July 2004. Table 1 below details the stages 

towards meeting that target. 

Table 1 

STAGES 

TIMESCALE 

Hillingdon Youth Council Conference: Presentation and discussion 26 February 2004 

(am) 

Hillingdon Assembly for Physically Disabled and Sensory Impaired 

People 

Prepare for advertising consultation programme in: Hillingdon People 

in the April/May issue, other publications, and the Transport Strategy 

website 

Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee: 

Consideration of 4 th March Cabinet report on response to the 

preliminary consultation 

26 February 2004 

(pm) 

March 2004 

1 st March 2004 

Cabinet :Consider the report on preliminary consultation response 4 th March 2004 

Environment Overview and Scrutiny: consider Cabinet report on 

draft Transport Strategy 

29 th March 2004 



All Members seminar on the content of the draft Borough Transport 

Strategy (BTS) and programme of consultation as contained in the 

1 st April Cabinet report. 

Cabinet: consider draft Borough Transport Strategy for formal 

consultation 

Formal consultation on the draft BTS 

30 th March 2004 

7-9pm 

1 st April 2004 

Mid April– mid/late 

May 2004 

Presentation to and consultation with the Local Strategic Partnership 19 April 2004 

Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee: consider Cabinet 

report on the final Transport Strategy for adoption 

June 2004 

Cabinet : consider final Transport Strategy for adoption June 2004 

BOROUGH SOLICITOR’S COMMENTS 

18. There are none to be reported at this stage in the preparation of the Borough 

Transport Strategy. 

DIRECTOR OF FINANCE COMMENTS 

19. All of the costs incurred in preparing the strategy are being met from existing 

Planning and Transportation Services’ budgets and also from the Parking Revenue 

Account, which has funding ring-fenced specifically to meet the costs of preparing 

the Borough Transport Strategy. 


Borough Transport Conference 24 th November 2003: feedback from the workshops. 

Consultant’s analyses of comments from individual questionnaires and residents and 

tenants’ association meetings. 



APPENDIX 1 

Residents and Tenants Associations consulted September 2003 – January 2004. 

• Hayes Town Centre Residents Association 

• Cranford Cross Residents Association 

• Harefield Tenants and Residents Association 

• Whitehall Residents Association 

• Harmondworth and Sipson Residents Association 

• Harlington Residents Association 

• Hillingdon Alliance of Residents Associations 

• North Uxbridge Residents Association 

• Northwood Hills Residents Association 

• Violet Avenue Tenants and Residents Association 

• Northwood Residents Association 

• Hillingdon Tenants and Residents Association. 

Residents and Tenants Associations that did not respond are: 

• Home Farm Residents Association 

• North Hayes 

• Colham Green 

• The Larches 

• Oak Farm 

• Pastures Mead 

• Vine Lane 

• West Ruislip Commuters Association 

• Ferndale Area 

• Glebe 



HILLINGDON BOROUGH TRANSPORT CONFERENCE: INVITEES 

APPENDIX 2 

Councillors 

NAME INVITED ATTENDANCE ADDRESS TELEPHONE E-MAIL 

Cllr Mike Heywood 26/9/03 

Overview and Scrutiny 

Cllr Baker 26/9/03 Yes Member bbaker@hillingdon.gov.uk 

Cllr Peter Ryderson 26/9/03 Yes Member 

Cllr Bishop 26/9/03 Yes Member 01923 826610 dbishop@hillingdon.gov.uk 

Cllr. N. Nunn-Price 26/9/03 Yes Member 01895 478916 Nnunn-price@hillingdon.gov.uk 

Cllr. R. Puddifoot 26/9/03 No 

Cllr S.Stone 26/9/03 Yes Member cllsstone@hillingdon.gov.uk 

Cllr D. Routledge 26/9/03 Yes Member 01895 27050 

Cllr A. Banks 26/9/03 Yes Member 01895 436112 

Cllr J Rhodes 26/9/03 Yes Member 01895 234348 

Cllr John Hensley No Member 

Cllr Harmsworth 26/9/03 No Member 01895 250127 

Cllr John Major 26/9/03 Yes Member 01895250780 

Cllr Lakham Yes Member 

Cllr R. Barnes 26/09/03 No Member 

Cllr S. Jenkins 26/09/03 Yes Member sj@hillingdon.gov.uk 

Cllr J. O’Neill 26/09/03 Yes Member 01895676501 Jo’neill@Hillingdon.gov.uk 

Cllr Paramit Sethi Yes Member 

Cllr Phoday Jarjussey Yes Member 

Chief Officers 

Chief Executive 26/9/03 

Ruth Willis 26/9/03 




Jean Palmer 26/9/03 

Philomena Bach 26/9/03 

Brian Murrell 26/9/03 

Council Officers 

Janet Rangeley 22/9/03 Yes 

Veronica Pinto 22/9/03 Yes 

Tom Fisher 22/9/03 Yes 

Gary Collier 22/9/03 Yes 

Mary Worrall 22/9/03 Yes 

Chandra Raval 22/9/03 Yes 

Jack Webster 22/9/03 

Sabeeha Mannan 22/9/03 

Shane Brackenbury 22/9/03 

Elaine Carter 22/9/03 

Julie Evans 22/9/03 Yes Education Youth 

7697 jdevans@hillingdon.gov.uk 

Leisure 

Denis Judge 22/9/03 

Paul Williams 22/9/03 

Peter Friend 22/9/03 Yes 

Nigel Coates 22/9/03 No 

Andy Codd 22/9/03 Yes 

Wendy Rogers 22/9/03 Yes 

Val Beale 22/9/03 

Peggy Law 22/9/03 

Doug Williamson 22/9/03 Yes 

Jonathan Westell 22/9/03 

Andy Stubbs 22/9/03 Yes 01895 251281 astubbs@hillingdon.gov.uk 




MPs 

John Randall 22/9/03 Yes 

John McDonnell 22/9/03 Yes 02085690010 

John Wilkinson 22/9/03 Yes johnwilkinson@parliament.uk 




STAKEHOLDER GROUPS 

Arandale Couriers 

Piers Scrimshaw-Wright 22/9/03 Arlington House 

0118 930 4141 p.scrimshaw_wright@arlington.co.uk 

Arlington Business Park 

Theale, Reading 

RG7 4SA 

Arriva the Shires and Essex 

Nick Knox No 934-974 Marchwood House 

01923662325 

Watford 

Herfordshire 

WD25 9NN 

Tony Tallant 20/10/03 General Manager(Buckinghamshire) 

Arriva the Shires Ltd 

Newlands Bus Station 

High Wycombe 

Bucks HP11 2HU 

BAA 

Andy Wadham 22/9/03 No BAA 

8745 6169 

Heathrow Point West 

234 Bath Rd 

Harlington 

UB3 5AP 

Nicola Hooper 13/10/03 Yes BAA Heathrow 0208745 5966 Nicola_hooper@baa.com 

BA 

Steve Smith 22/9/03 Airport Policy Manager 

8738 9808 

British Airways 

Waterside (HDA3) 

PO Box 365 

Harmondsworth 

MIDDX UB7 0GB 

British Waterways 

Annie Hilder 29/9/03 Landscape Architect 

British Waterways 

The Toll House 

Delamere Terrace 

Little Venice 

London W2 6ND 

3552 




Brownes Minibuses 

Eddie/Pam Brownes 22/9/03 10 Old Orchard Close 

01895 440145 

Hillingdon 

UB8 3LH 

Capital Call 

Paul Jones 22/9/03 Transport Co-ordination Centre 

7275 2446 Capitalcall@hackneyct.org 

C/o HCT 

Ash Grove bus depot, Mare Street, LONDON, E8 

4RH 

Chiltern Railways 

Steward Yateman Great Central House 

02073333032 

Marylebone Station 

Melcombe Place 

London 

NW1 6JJ 

Connecting Communities / Hillingdon Muslin Council 

Mr Amir Ahmed 22/09/03 15/10/03 

Yes 

DASH 

Angela Wegener 22/9/03 Yes, e-mail 

reply 

Hillingdon Muslin Council 

5 Harries Road 

Hayes 

UB4 9DD 

Wood End Centre 

Judge Heath Lane 

Hayes 

Middx 

UB3 2PB 

02088418097 

Fax 

02085811424 

8848 8319 Info@dash.org.uk 

Pauline Cooper 22/9/03 Yes 01895 672568 Pauline@cooper63.fslife. 

co.uk 

Freight Quality Partnership 

Mike Slinn 22/9/03 MVA House 

Victoria Way 

Woking 

Surrey 

GU21 6DD 

Friends of the Earth 

22/9/03 Rosemary Bennett, 3 Rectory Way, Ickenham, 

UB10 8BP 




HAVS 

Carol Coventry 22/9/03 Key House 

01895 442722 

106 High Street 

Yiewsley 

UB7 7BQ 

J. Betteridge Yes 01895442929 jenib@havs.org.uk 

Hayes Town Centre Partnership 

Mohammed Haniff 22/9/03 Yes Hayes Town Centre Manager 

02088137733 mhaniff@hillingdon.gov.uk 

72-74 Station Rd 

Hayes 

Heathrow Airport 

Roads Policy Officer Heathrow Point 

234 Bath Road 

MIDDX 

UB3 5AP 

Heathrow Area Transport Forum 

Alastair Duff 29/9/03 Westward House 

155-157 Staines Rd 

Hounslow 

Middx TW3 3JB 


Angela Flux 30/9/03 Fountains Mill 

81 High Street 

Uxbridge 

Dr. Hilary Pickles Yes Director of Public Health 01895452045 Hiliary.pickles@hillingdon.nhs.uk 

Hillingdon Chamber of Commerce 

Mike Langan 22/9/03 Yes 19 Station Rd, Hayes 

UB3 4BD 

0208 5691197 info@hillingdonchamber.com 

Hillingdon Chat 

6/10/03 webmaster@hillingdonchat.com 

Hillingdon Community Transport 

John Reid 30/9/03 General Manager 

Harlington Road Depot 

Block B 

Hillingdon Cycling Forum 

Steve Ayres 22/9/03 Yes 90 Hercies Rd 

UB10 9ND 

01895 230953 Steve1.ayres@hotmail.com 




Beryl Bell 22/9/03 No 1 Leven Way 

colinberyl@compuserve.com 

Hayes 

UB3 2SR 

Cliff Jones 22/9/03 Yes 18 Pepys Close 

01895 638317 Cliff.jones@btinternet.com 

UB10 8NL 

Sarah James 22/9/03 29/9/03 

Yes 

64 Bridle Rd 

HA5 2SH 

Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust 

Wendy Scarr Yes 01895279961 wendy.scar@thh.nhs.uk 

Tina Dinch 13/10/03 Yes 01895 279856 tina.dench@thh.nhs.uk 

Hillingdon Primary Care Trust 

Dr Hilary Pickles 

Yes 01895 452045 hilary.pickles@hillingdon. 

Director Public Health 

Shirley Goodwin 22/9/03 Yes Hillingdon Primary Care Trust 

Kirk House 

97-109 High Street 

Yiewsley 

West Drayton, MIDDX, UB7 7HJ 

Hillingdon Times and Gazette 

Rachel Sharp 6/10/03 Yes Bucks Free Press & Times Group 

Gomm Road 

High Wycombe 

Bucks HP13 7DW 

Hindu Cultural Association 

Anil Mitra 3/10/03 Yes 

10/10/03 

gov.uk 

01895 452094 shirley.goodman@hillingdon.gov.uk 

01494755112 rsharp@london.newsquest.co.uk 

01494677916? 

Dr. Bhargava 3/10/03 Yes 

10/10/03 

IBM 

Les Johns Yes 

23/10/03 

Global Logistics Procurement & Projects Manager 

UK & Ireland 

IBM Integrated Supply Chain (ISC) 

Greenford 

01895676939 

020 88325213 JOHNSL3@UK.IBM.COM 




Liftshare 

Marcus Seaman 22/9/03 Yes 

25/9/03 

marcus@liftshare.com 

Butterfly Hall 

Attleborough 

Norfolk 

NR17 1AB 

Gateway Enterprise 

Jay Seeburrun 22/9/03 Unit K 

International House 

Bridge Park 

Southall UB2 4AB 

Groundwork Thames Valley 

Keren Jones 22/9/03 Colne Valley Park Centre 

Denham Court Drive 

Denham 

UB9 5PG 

HACCA 

Heather Callender Yes HACCA 02085820664 

The Licensed Taxi Drivers Association 

The General Secretary 9-11 Wood Field Road 


W9 2AB 

Living Streets 

Paul Holdsworth 22/9/03 31-33 Bondway 

London, SW8 1SJ 

London Ambulance Service 

David Court Yes Royal Lane 


MIDDX 

UB8 3QX 

London Buses Operating Services 

Adrian Dempsey Area Traffic Controller NW 

Bakers Road 

Uxbridge, Middlesex 

LFB 

R. Goodman-Brown No 02085680199 

London Fire Emergency Planning Authority 

Marion House 

61 Staines Road 

Hounslow 

Middlesex TW3 3JQ 

8917 9286 jayseeburrun@jjewel.com 

7820 1010 Info@livingstreets.org.uk 

01895 255242 david.court@lond-amb.nhs.uk 




London Buses 

Jeff Tucker 22/9/03 First Uxbridge Garage 

01895 236598 

Bakers Court 

Uxbridge MIDDX 

UB8 1RJ 

George Goodridge First Uxbridge Garage 

01895 258647 Adrain.Dempsey@tfl-buses.co.uk 

Bakers Court 

Uxbridge MIDDX 

UB8 1RJ 

Many Shades of Green 

Denise Chetram Yes 

01895422333 

10/10//03 

Metroline 

Norman Law 118-122 College Road 

020 82188888 

Harrow 

Middlesex 

HA1 1DB 

Metronet 

Roger Hedley 22/9/03 Metronet 

02079326200 

40 Melton St 


NW1 2EE 

Metropolitan Police 

Mark Toland 22/9/03 Borough Commander 

8246 1492 

Uxbridge Police Station 

1 Warwick Place 

Uxbridge 

Middlesex UB8 1RG 

Chief Inspector Ian Brooks 10/10/03 Yes Metropolitan Police 

02082469801 Ian.brooks@met.police.uk 

Alperton Road 

Middlesex HA0 1EW (sent by e mail) 

PC Paul Richards Yes NW Partnership Focus Desk 

02082469811 Paul.Richards@met.police.uk 

Athlon Road 

Alperton 

Wembley 

Middlesex 

HA1 1EW 

Mick Morris Yes 02082461473 Mick.m.morris@met.police.uk 

NOTRAG 

No Gill Cannon gill.cannon@infonotrag.org.uk 




Christine Taylor 6/10/03 Yes 22 Raywood Close 

02085648345 mathewstc@aol.com 

Harlington UB3 5NL 

Older People’s Forum 

Surgit S Gill 

Open Spaces Society 

David Williams 22/9/03 30 Sweetcroft Lane 

Uxbridge 

UB10 9LE 

Securiplan 

6/10/03 Chevron House 

346 Long Lane 


Stockley Park Consortium 

Robert Burlumi 22/9/03 Operations Director 

01895 444100 Robert_burlumi@stockleypark.co.uk 


The Management Suite 

5 Ironbridge Road 

Stockley Park 

Uxbridge 

Middlesex 

UB11 1HB 

Andrew Van Der Mersch 22/9/03 Stockley Park 


The Management Suite 

5 Ironbridge Rd 

Stockley Park 

Uxbridge 

UB11 1HB 

Strategic Rail Authority 

Mr Graham Cross 22/9/03 Rail Development Manager 

55 Victoria Street 


SW1H 0EU 

Steve Shaw No steveshaw@sra.gov.uk 

SWELTRAC 

John Barclay 22/9/03 Maybe 16 Rydal Drive 

West Wickham 

KENT 

BR4 9QH 




TFL 

Richard Carr 22/9/03 TfL London Bus Services Ltd 

79183416 

172 Buckingham Palace Rd 

LONDON 

SW1W 9TN 

Nick Atkinson 29/9/03 TFL North/West Team 

02079417079 

Windsor House 

42-50 Victoria Street 

London SW1H 0TL 

Peter Livermore 22/9/03 TfL 

02079414731 

Head of Borough Partnerships 

Windsor House 

42-50 Victoria Street 


SW1H 0TL 

Phil Cummings Yes TFL 02070279105 philcummings@gov.uk 

Darren Womack 29/9/03 Project Director 

02070279108 

WL Tram Project 

Victoria Station House 

191 Victoria Street 

London SW1E 5NE 

Mr G. Beswick Bus Priority: TfL 

Street Management 

1 st Floor Faith Lawson House 

15-17 Dacre Street 

SW1H 0NR 

Thames Trains 

Royce Mumby Turbo Maintenance Depot 

Cow Lane 

Reading 

Royce.mumby@ 

thamestrains.co.uk 

TfL Public Carriage Office 

Robin Gillis 

(Cab Rank Officer) 

Yes 

15 Penton Street 


N1 9PU 

Trimite Ltd 

Mr Steve Griggs 6/10/03 Yes Arundel Road 

Uxbridge 

Middx 

02079417829 Robin.gillis@pco.org.uk 

01895251234 Steve.griggs@trimite.com 




Uxbridge Buses 

Stavros Heracleous 13/10/03 Yes First Uxbridge Garage 

01895236598 Stavros.heracleous@firstgroup.com 

Bakers Court 

Uxbridge 

Middlesex 

Peter Stringer Yes As above 01895236598 Peter.stringer@firstgroup.com 

Uxbridge Initiative 

Clive Godsave (yes) 22/9/03 No (John 

Palmer) 

Pavilions Shopping Centre 

18 Chequers Square 

01895274059 

C.Godsave 

UB8 1LN 

Tony Dunn 22/9/03 Management Suite 

The Chimes Shopping Centre 

High Street 

Uxbridge 

UB8 1UV 

01895 819400 Tony-dunn@capshop.co.uk 

Uxbridge Skip Hire 

S. Manlet 6/10/03 No Skip Lane 

Harvil Road 

Harefield 

Uxbridge UB9 6JL 

West Drayton Car Spares 

Mr. O’Dell 6/10/03 The Common 

West Drayton 

West Drayton Initiative Group 

6/10/03 Tony Pilkington 

Bell Farm Church 

Bell Farm Estate 

West Drayton 

West London Buses Ltd 

Macmillon House 

Paddington Station 


W2 1TY 

West London Business 

Kate Ashton Yes 02086072509 

Wings 

Fred Gritt 22/9/03 8573 8388 fred@wingstravel.co.uk 




Yiewsley West Drayton Town Action Group 

Doreen Tarrant 6/10/03 Yes Mrs. D. Tarrant 

01895851168 

35 Warwick Rd 

West Drayton 

Youth Council 

Jennifer McChee Youth & Community Services 

Civic Centre 3S/07 




RESIDENTS GROUPS 

Whitethorne Estate Residents 

Paul Carney 22/9/03 66 Yew Avenue 

Yiewsley 

MIDDX 

Eastcote Residents Association 

M.A. Platti 22/9/03 No 7 Robarts Close 

Pinner 

MIDDX 

HA5 2QA 

Philpots Farm Residents Association 

22/9/03 17 Heather Lane 

Yiewsley 

Middx 

Harmondsworth and Sipson Residents Association 

Mrs B Sobey 22/9/03 No 486 Sipson Rd 

02087591677 

Sipson 

UB7 OHZ 

Hillingdon Village Residents Association 

Mr D Venn 22/9/03 High House 

33 Harlington Rd 

HILLINGDON 

UB8 3HX 

Townfield Association 

Mrs J Agius 22/9/03 9 Manor Rd 

Hayes 

UB3 

Harefield Village Forum 

Frazine Johnson 22/9/03 8573 6533 frazinejohnson@lawyer.com 

Ruislip Chamber of Commerce 

Tony Unger 

Northwood Residents Association 

Simon Varnals 22/9/03 Yes 12 Kewferry Road 

Northwood 

Middx 

019234500917 simon@varnals.com 




Hillingdon Federation of Tenants 

John Waylett 22/9/03 Yes 103 Moorfield Road 

01895823326 

Cowley 

Middx 

Ickenham Residents Association 

22/9/03 32 Swakeleys Drive 

Ickenham 

UB10 8QD 

London Borough Hillingdon Tenants & Residents Federation 

Mrs. Grace Ganden 22/9/03 67 The Larches 


Harefield Tenants and Residents Association 

Mrs. P Crawley 22/9/03 Yes 32 Sanctuary Close 

Harefield 

Middx 

Botwell Tenants & Residents Association 

22/9/03 Townfield Community Centre 

Townfield Road 

Hayes Middx 

Brookgreen Residents Association 

Peter Clark 22/9/03 3 Welbeck Court Welbeck Avenue 

Hayes 

Cranford Cross Residents Association 

Mr. D F Bell 22/9/03 Yes 83 Saunton Avenue 

Harlington 

Harlington Village Association 

Dean Langley 22/9/03 3 Gothic Court 

Harlington, Middx 

Hayes Town Centre Residents Association 

Robert McGowan 22/9/03 Yes 

Mr. & Mrs 

60 Skeffington Court 

Silverdale Road 

Hayes 

Road Sea Express 

Les Eastlake Unit 6 

Wyvern Way 

Uxbridge 

0208 8488384 Chris@hayes.townta.com.uk 

01895 811888 




Pastures Mead Residents Association 

Miss C G Kenway 22/9/03 20 pastures Mead 


Home Farm Residents Association 

M Greengrow 22/9/03 Yes 67 Blacklands Drive 

Hayes End 

North Hayes Residents Association 

Mr. J E Rutter 22/9/03 50 Weymouth Rd 

Hayes 

The Larches Residents Association 

Mrs. Grace Gganden 22/9/03 67 The Larches 


Vine Lane Residents Association 

Philip Coleham 22/9/03 82 Vine Lane 


Violet Ave Tenants & Residents Association 

Mr. R. Cook 22/9/03 8 Bramble Close 


Gatehill (Northwood) Residents Association 

Mr. S. Lee 22/9/03 17 Gatehill Road, Northwood stephenwlee@btinternet.com 

South Ruislip Residents 

Mrs. D. Wingrove-Owens 22/9/03 4 Diamond Road 

South Ruislip 

West Ruislip Commuters Association 

Miss S F Sweeting 22/9/03 125 The Greenway 

Ickenham 

Brearley Close residents Association 

Mrs. E. Brennan 22/9/03 18 Brearley Close 

Uxbridge 

Ferndale Area Residents Association 

Mr. R. Swallow 22/9/03 28 Ferndale Crescent 

01895 239951 

Uxbridge 

Middx UB8 2AX 

North Uxbridge Residents Association 

Mrs. S. Confavreux 22/9/03 18 Water Tower Close 

sue@confavreux.co.uk 

Uxbridge 

Uxbridge Moor Residents Association 

Robert English 22/9/03 36 Cobden Close 

Uxbridge 

English@safeway.co.uk 




Whitehall Residents Association 

Mrs. E. Saunders 22/9/03 2 walford Rd 

Uxbridge 

Middx 

Glebe Residents Association 

Community Café 22/9/03 60 Byron Way 

West Drayton 

South Ruislip Residents Association 

Mr. R. Dean 22/9/03 Yes 9 Manor Gardens 

Ruislip HA4 6UB 

Dial A Ride 

22/9/03 Yes Keith Matthew 0208 2330011 

Oak Farm Residents Association 

Tom Crow 22/903 Yes 114 Granvillle Rd 


UB10 9AG 

Ruislip Residents Association 

6/10/03 Lewis Hawken 

21 Sherleys Court 

Wood Lane 

Ruislip HA4 6DH 

Eastcote Chamber of Commerce 

Jennifer Boutique 22/9/03 125 Field End rd 

Eastcote 

MIDDX 

Laurel Lane Tenants and Residents Association 

Mr. Banks 6/10/03 No 

21/10/2003 

HA5 1QH 

92 Rowan Road 

West Drayton 

UB7 7UD 

02088457096 bob@dean09.fsnet.co.uk 

01895 237523 

0208866 7106 



APPENDIX 3 

BOROUGH TRANSPORT CONFERENCE 

FOCUS GROUP NOTES 

This report outlines the key / consensus points made at the 5 focus groups of the Borough Transport 

Conference. These focus groups were: 

• Parking 

• Public transport 

• Air Quality and transport 

• General Accessibility Issues 

• Business 

Priorities identified in both focus groups sessions have been underlined. Notes taken correspond with 

the discussion themes identified and the format therefore varies between the groups. 

PARKING 

Commercial and Residential Car Parking Restraint 

1. All commercial development should have adequate provision – also applies to flats 

2. Hillingdon different to other parts of London 

3. Can the standards be altered so that there may be local flexibility? 

4. Hillingdon charge less than Harrow for car parks 

5. Free all day parking in residential roads stops car parks being fully utilised 

6. Councillors and residents annoyed at off-street parking restrictions 

7. Freight should be off-loaded at a central point and have a commercial free-zone 

8. Concern at effect on local businesses if parking is limited 

9. Park and ride is a good idea and reduces the need for town centre car parks 

10. 2 hours free parking should be made available for lunchtime 

11. No free permits should be made available for developments that do not provide on-site 

parking 

12. Developments should make more provision for disabled users 

13. There is a lack of parking provided on developments 

14. Increasing in off-street parking reduces on-street pressure 

15. Hillingdon attracts external workers 



Re-allocation of Road Space from Parking 

1. Hayes and Harrow pedestrianised areas have resulted in a drop in business activity 

2. Enforcement of bus lanes needs to be done sensibly 

3. Priority must be given to buses 

4. Parking must not interfere with bus services 

5. Concern at problems caused by disabled parking 

6. Residents should have overnight permits for night time space in car parks 

7. Lack of enforcement on Sundays 

8. Re-allocation is difficult in the Borough despite working well in Uxbridge 

9. Bus lanes are beneficial but not in narrow roads 

10. Bus stops should be better enforced 

11. Businesses have difficulty with bus lanes, delays are created 

12. School run should be reduced 

13. Disabled parking causes obstruction 

14. S106 money can be used for school buses 

15. Reduce disabled parking from 3 to 2, or 1 hours 

16. Get bus drivers to pull into stops 

17. Why are cars allowed to park free of charge on roads near the tube station? 

Competitions and Comparisons with Other Areas 

1. Free or cheap parking increases use of car parks 

2. Costly parking fees restricts freedom of movement 

3. Park and ride may be effective 

4. Problems of tube stations caused mostly by Borough residents 

5. New parking schemes deter commuters 

6. LT parking is expensive – price matters and needs to be discussed with LT 

7. Park and ride is sensible 

8. Free on-street parking determines car park use 

9. Money into bus services from the shires 

10. Problems caused by Hillingdon being at the end of lines 

11. Need LT to have a combined tube parking ticket 

12. Figures of travel patterns to Borough required 

13. Park and shop 

Parking Controls and Enforcement 

1. Council taking reactive rather than proactive view on parking controls 

2. Public Consultation on PMAs are pointless due to the lack of consensus 

3. Let Councillors decide on scheme introduction 

4. Little enforcement of zigzags outside schools 

5. Every resident should be issued with a parking permit to park on their street 



6. Number of police officers on traffic controls down, limiting enforcing ability of Council 

7. Parking attendants need to be increased 

8. Enforcement needs to be more targeted and longer hours 

9. Residents are willing to pay for parking permits 

10. Parking restrictions near stations – a yellow line or some other restriction 

11. Parking causes obstruction to emergency service vehicles 

12. Need a balance between needs of commuter and safety 

Other Parking Users 

1. Indiscriminate parking causes severe problems – disrupts loading and unloading 

2. Some blue badge holders have them without justification 

3. Ruislip High Street and Ruislip Manor parking cause problems including safety 

4. Misuse of blue badges by relatives of disabled 

5. Written warning for disabled who park badly 



PUBLIC TRANSPORT 

What Aspects of Public Transport within Hillingdon are Successful? 

1. Local bus services successful especially at Hayes 

2. North-South Borough links are poor 

3. U9 route in Harefield is good 

4. The 331 service is not so good 

5. 282 is a good route but only to the East of the Borough – there are problems getting to 

Uxbridge 

How can Public Transport be Improved? 

1. Problems for taxis – too few ranks to service the large number of registered vehicles 

2. Cab ranks compliment taxi offices. Enhance the use of this form of transport and method of 

improving taxi service and public perception 

3. The R1 bus route needs to be more regular. Presently, there is only 1 bus per hour. Needs 

to be extended to Watford. 

4. Use of freedom passes on busses passing into the Borough from the shires, etc. 

5. Lorries on the road during rush hour are contributing to congestion 

6. Suggested that lorries need be banned from roads during peak times as in France. 

7. Request for local run of the 207 from Uxbridge to Hayes By-pass 

8. Problem with Heathrow bus capacity reaching its limit 

9. Request to have U4 stop closer to the emergency exit 

10. School planning for public transport; need to ‘plan for red’ to ensure access to all schools via 

good public transport 

11. School green travel plans must be easy to understand and implement 

12. Problems related to routing bus services through heavily populated areas as there is a lack of 

road space 

13. Design of buses not always good on the 140 service 

14. Need for greater frequency of services in the North of the Borough and outlying areas 

Safer Routes to School – Do they induce a Modal Shift? 

1. Question of how many schools serviced by a bus service 

2. Metropolitan police hitting schools – enforcement of parking and speed offences 

3. Walking buses needed 

4. Car sharing between parents 

5. Free bus travel for under 11’s 

6. Information coming from schools is that children do want to walk 

7. Problem that there are too many initiatives in schools at the moment 

8. Need to bring across to parents the benefits of kids walking and cycling to school 

9. Problems with air pollution for children walking 

10. Changes in catchment areas has led to a problem with distances from schools 



Does Bus and Cycle Priority Work? 

1. Works very well abroad 

2. Enforce parking regulations where buses traditionally get held up 



AIR QUALITY AND TRANSPORT 

Key themes for the workshops: 

1. Reduction in traffic, use of hard and soft options. 

2. The use of cleaner vehicle technology, 

SESSION I 

1. Incentives to promote the use of cleaner vehicles 

2. Promote cycling to school, work, etc. Careful management of traffic appears to make more 

impact. Promoting the use of cleaner vehicles may have less impact. 

3. Need to have alternatives before penalising with hard options 

4. Lower road tax for cleaner vehicles 

5. Poor cycle lanes in places, no facilities in the Civic Centre 

6. Stop heavy vehicles during rush hour to ease burden; staggering working hours 

7. Working with Highway Agency / government to promote high occupancy and the more 

effective use of roads 

8. Encourage Park and ride Schemes 

9. Publicity to switch off car engine while in a traffic jam 

10. Support for trams – links with other transport modes 

11. Adequate rail routes already exist to Central London, tram route will make roads narrower 

12. Integrated transport policy with tram playing a role 

13. Some support for congestion charging 

14. Trams are more energy efficient than buses; would encourage modal split 

15. Public transport is not accessible to everyone 

16. Trams will take more cars off the road 

17. Use of canals taken thousands of lorries off the road. More publicity required. Need to 

extend the use of waterways. 

18. Specific objectives for freight partnership 

19. Local action on freight is too late, it is becoming a national problem 

20. Local transport issues are more important. As a local authority we can do more them to effect 

changes. 

21. North-South transport link in the Borough needs to be improved 

22. Improve transport interchanges 

23. Bring in school buses 

24. Walking buses will improve health of children and traffic congestion. Will have greater impact 

as the initiatives are practical and can be started very quickly. Road safety also an issue. 

Parents could treat their children about road safety. 

25. Traffic fragmented; lack of co-ordination 

26. Parents car sharing reduces the cost of initiating cycle lanes 

27. More travel information 

28. Illegal parking, parking on pavements, and lack of enforcement on parking on bus lanes. 



6 Key Issues 

• Promote clean vehicles 

• Integration of transport system; bus with rail, etc. More accessibility required 

• Encourage use of canals and waterways 

• Concentrate on local transport initiatives where we can something about it 

• Promote safer routes to school and walking buses. Likely to have significant impact. 

• Promote park and ride 

Provide positive options 

SESSION II 

1. Integration of air quality policies with neighbouring local authorities 

2. How to get dirty vehicles off the road. Cleaner buses in Hillingdon. More enforcement on 

dirty vehicles. 

3. Look to reduce shorter journeys when catalytic converters are not working 

4. Availability of alternative fuels 

5. Need to work with parents and the younger generation 

6. Put pressure on vehicle manufacturers to produce cleaner vehicles 

7. Support for tram link will mean less cars on the road 

8. Need to approach transport problem holistically 

9. Car free town centres, but can force cars into adjacent residential areas 

10. Park and ride would encourage more cars into the Borough to park. The ability to reduce 

traffic is dependent upon where the car parks are located. 

11. Some traffic schemes may increase pollution. Need to ensure a balanced approach. 

12. Road pricing could reduce quality of life by limiting choice 

13. Weighing up different options to improve the environment 

14. Poor North-South transport links in the Borough 

15. Young people cannot travel to the South of the Borough to access services 

16. Free public transport 

17. Hillingdon website could provide links to other websites providing travel information 

18. Educate children to use public transport 

19. Free shuttle buses to transport hubs. Transport for London to provide free shuttle buses / 

feeder buses. 

20. Integrated transport system and better integration of transport hubs 

21. To promote green travel plans requires leadership, information, and the need to make work 

place changes 

22. Swap parking pass with a travel pass (exempt from tax) 

23. Gradually reduce parking to companies using planning powers 

24. Public education 

25. Integration of health and transport 



26. Appears to be a lack of traffic restraint measures in Hillingdon 

27. A reduction in traffic can lead to speeding and a reduction in road safety 

6 Key Issues 

• Need to be consistent in terms of policies and strategies 

• How to weigh importance of air quality against other criteria when evaluating traffic 

schemes 

• Need to target dirty vehicles at relevant locations. Raise public awareness also 

important 

• Integration of public transport system 

• General reduction in traffic and other safety issues 

Need to implement ‘hard options’ type of policy 



GENERAL ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES 

Themes Identified: 

• Access to hospitals and other health and community facilities 

• Walking and cycling routes to school 

• Safe and convenient routes to parks and open spaces 

• Access routes from disabled parking spaces to local shopping centres and community 

facilities 

• Safe and convenient access to public transport 

• Safe access to work 

SESSION I (Ideas for Improvement) 

Access routes from disabled parking spaces to local shopping centres and community 

facilities 

1. Better lighting 

2. Parking spaces at Hillingdon Hospital 

3. Better signage 

4. Better policing of blue badge system 

5. User friendly public transport system especially for the disabled 

6. Improved design of disabled persons parking spaces e.g. dropped kerbs 

7. Set up disability audit and mobility forum 

8. Restrict the number of disability passes issued 

9. Working with local business to provide better disabled parking facilities 

10. Location of disabled parking bays needs review 

Safe and convenient access to public transport 

11. Better information and access to it 

12. Better trained staff on public transport 

13. Study required of where people are originating and their destination. Facilitate the 

planning of appropriate transport services. 

14. Safety of access to public spaces needs review 

15. Greater emphasis on accidents and perception of threats to road safety 

16. Improved driver training – accommodate the needs of a variety of vulnerable users. 

17. Improved access to Hillingdon Hospital particularly for the aged 

18. Information such as street plans can be provided that outline, for example, the location of 

bus stops on different routes 

19. The waiting time for the U3 bus service has reduced 

20. Questions of access to cars / vans. Access to public transport requires improvement. 

21. Improvements need to be focussed so as to achieve the best results 

22. Integration of cars with public transport. Inter-modal links need to be accommodated. 



23. Address fear / perception of danger on public transport and getting access to these 

services. Perception is an important element. Links to crime and disorder strategy need to 

be highlighted. 

24. Speedy repair of bus stops. Hardier material is required to resist vandalism. 

25. Speeding along Harlington Road is an issue 

26. Greater levels of social inclusion are necessary. Inclusion is reduced with restricted 

access to public transport and traffic congestion. 

27. Pedestrian phasing of traffic lights – allow pedestrians more time at crossing facilities 

28. Negative impacts of tactile paving and need for auditory signals so that access for people 

with all types of impairments is improved 

29. Reduce the distance between bus stops 

Safe access to work 

30. Encourage business travel plans. These need to accommodate issues of impairment, 

disablement, and carers. 

SESSION II (Ideas for improvement) 

1. Better lighting at bus stops 

2. Move taxi rank to the front of Uxbridge Station (Priority) 

3. Improve physical infrastructure e.g. at Hayes Station 

4. Improve cycle parking availability at Hayes Station 

5. Greater flexibility in modal change – interchange facilities 

6. Introduce DLR type service between Staines and the airport 

7. Stronger bus shelters 

8. Better transport integration and the promotion of the seamless journey 

9. Time to get on and off trains needs to be extended 

10. Countdown information should also be provided for trains 

11. Promote the habit of using public transport through education 

12. Improve access to platforms and lifts at train stations (Priority) 

13. Improve travel information at bus stops 

14. Improve the quality of the public transport service 

15. Better links between Hounslow and Uxbridge 

16. Address congestion at Uxbridge station 

17. Yellow lines at bus stops to discourage stopping and parking by private vehicles 

18. Engineering challenge: pupils are given the task of suggesting ideas on how disabled access 

can be improved (Priority) 

19. Improve cycle lanes 

20. Bus reliability (Priority) 

21. Provide more and widespread information so that additional markets can be tapped into 

22. Improve the whole environment of Uxbridge bus station 



23. Understand and address impairment issues 

24. Enhancing comfort on public transport would enhance perceptions and potentially use (top 

priority) 

25. Improve ease of access to buses 

26. Promote taxis and taxi cards 

27. Improve disabled parking facilities 

28. Discourage car use through disincentives 

29. Safety tips provided for public transport users 

30. Better planning of the public transport system (Priority) 

31. Reduce barriers for getting luggage on and off trains, buses, etc. (Priority) 

Walking and cycling routes to school 

32. Study required on the nature of movement to and from schools 

33. Create safe crossing points 

34. Introduce Safe Routes to Schools 

35. Change overall public attitude through a social campaign that highlights links with health and 

quality of life 

36. Carefully consider the width of cycle lanes 

37. Stop parking on cycle lanes 

38. Parking should be provided by employers 

39. Encourage multi-agency approach to traffic, enforcement, etc. 

40. Cycling in parks – study required to resolve conflict between park users 

41. Deal with cyclists on pavements and fear for children 

42. Provide segregation on pavements to allow safe use by a variety of users. Conflict resolution 

is necessary. 

43. Create greater inducements for staff to reduce car use and explore alternative modes 

44. Better cycle education 

45. Means of transporting bags etc. should be provided to children wanting to participate in a 

walking bus. 

46. Better road maintenance is required especially on cycle lanes 

47. Teachers should be setting an example by not using cars to get to school 

48. 20mph zones need to be explored (Priority) 

49. Close roads outside schools during the school run 

50. Sign up parents, children and staff for walking to school 



BUSINESS 

SESSION I 

Freight 

1. Need a definition for freight. Freight exists because people need something. Freight quality 

partnership. 

2. Size of lorries makes access into residential roads difficult. Greater collaboration with 

Transport for London is needed. 

3. 70% of freight is distribution 

4. Deliveries are for everyone 

5. Balance is required that brings vitality and benefits to towns and villages 

6. Supermarket deliveries at night cause disturbance through vibration 

7. More signage is required to reduce congestion 

8. Heavy commercial vehicles plan / strategy – outlining where HGV’s should and should not go 

9. Electric directions device 

10. Builders merchants should have one lorry at a time so as not to disrupt road traffic 

11. Need to bring business on board. Bus network delivery within funding available. 

Green Travel Plans 

1. Larger companies are more structured. 

2. London Borough of Hillingdon should be leading the way. Business looks to the Council to 

ask for help in developing green travel plans. 

3. School traffic accounts for 20% of traffic in the mornings. Studies of American style school 

buses. 

4. Keep cyclists off the pavements. What about the disabled on pavements? 

5. Business should be encouraged to produce a green travel plan. Loss from travelling is built 

into salaries. 

6. How do you recruit, train and retain staff? 

Parking 

1. Parking is a major issue: for customers (ease of accessibility), free parking and workers / 

employees taking up free parking. 

2. Do parking restrictions achieve what they set out to do? It is driving people to use their cars 

3. Road closing kills business 

4. People abuse free parking 

5. Problems with emissions 

6. Delivery times needs to considered. No deliveries between 10am-4pm. The business 

economy. 

7. Permit system. Controlled parking and enable a mix of deliveries. Contract and extend 

permit time. 



8. Enforcement 

9. Congestion charging at Heathrow 

10. Park and ride created problem of congestion in the surrounding streets 

11. Charge for parking but offer people an alternative. In central London public transport 

provision is good. 

12. Bus station in Uxbridge has no more space to expand 

13. Linkages between the counties 

14. Slough highway – improve interchange 

15. Major shops are threatening to move 

16. Flaws in the congestion charging process and question whether problems would be created 

at Heathrow if it were introduced 

SESSION II 

Freight 

1. Flow of traffic is important however lorries and delivery vehicles hold up traffic 

2. Distribution centres need to be relocated as they are close to residential areas. This would 

remove time restrictions. 

3. Question why deliveries on the high street are at 10am instead of 7am? 

4. Routes for lorries. 45 tonne lorries cannot get under the bridge in South Ruislip up Pembroke 

Road. A bottleneck is created. 

5. Better to unload at rear of shops. However, there is usually poor access to the rear of 

shopping centres. Would be willing to pay for better lanes and access. Question of 

ownership and levels of agreement with shopkeepers. 

6. Small improvements could make a significant impact 

7. There is no joined up thinking between shopping parades. Shops are struggling. 

8. Lack of discussion 

9. Lorries parking in bus lanes contribute to congestion 

10. Who decides where the bus lanes are? 24 hour bus lanes and restricted bus lanes. Good 

knowledge of the area is required. More co-ordination and collaboration between Boroughs is 

required. 

11. Should be a designated freight lane (bus lane). Business is losing money when it cannot 

deliver on time. 

12. Traffic drives up cost 

13. BAA Central Distribution Depot – significant reductions in congestion and emissions 

Green Travel Plans 

1. Green travel plans cost a lot but it also saves a lot of money. Savings are made in office 

space. Travel plan can be cost neutral. 

2. What is the threshold of business size where a travel plan is required? 5 staff 

3. The Council is to appoint a Green Travel Plan co-ordinator in the near future. 



4. Public transport infrastructure needs to be in place in order for people to get out of their 

cars. Uxbridge is poorly accessible via public transportation. 

5. More motorbike parking spaces required 

6. Public transport convenience and reliability needs to be improved 

7. Business is being driven away. Planning decisions of 20 years ago would promote 

supermarkets with free parking. A lack of parking affects parking and shopping parades 

die as a result. 

8. Green travel plans are not anti-car or anti-business. Occasional changes can be made. 

9. Car sharing works well but needs organisation 

10. The Council has no green travel plan yet but it intends to develop one 

11. Cycle lanes are put in for the sake of it because they are not used. Lanes cause 

congestion. 

12. While density on cycle lanes is low they are nevertheless used throughout the day. 

13. Access into Oxford and Hillingdon Road is poor and can impact negatively upon Uxbridge 

14. Park and ride around the Borough is agreeable by surrounding Boroughs. Needs to be 

used for local people and not for those going into central London. 

15. Provision for local workers. Parking is unaffordable. 

16. Improve local stations as interchanges and improve links with other stations 

17. People who live and work in the Borough should be prioritised 

18. Transport for London has a lot to answer for. Several businesses contribute but do not 

get enough in return from Transport for London. They do not want to discuss parking and 

traffic issues with Hillingdon. 

19. Reduce charges in Chimes and the Pavilions. May attract the community to park and 

shop in the centres. 

20. Planning decisions are causing problems 

21. Building above stations 

22. Car boot sales in South Bucks takes business away from Uxbridge 

Accessibility 

1. North-South connections in the Borough are poor and there and people are therefore forced 

to use their cars. No bus link between South Ruislip and Uxbridge. Orbital routes are 

required within and outside the Borough. 

2. Integrated travelling throughout the Borough 

Pedestrianisation 

1. Pedestrianisation of Hayes is a partial solution. A one-way system could open the centre up. 

A by-pass that is a car park. Joined up thinking. 

2. Town centres need people not cars. 

3. Key workers need parking to avoid getting fined 

4. Weekend demand for parking 



5. Uxbridge is growing fast. It needs to be integrated. Rules should be set. Business move into 

a safe and attractive place. 

6. Quality of stations and bus services is poor 

6 Key Issues 

• Plan / strategy required for heavy vehicles (as to where they can go) 

• Green Travel Plans should be produced by local businesses. Travel costs should be 

built into salaries. Does this in fact happen? 

• Parking is a major issue for customers 

• Better enforcement of parking regulations; permit system - priority, controlled parking; 

and park and ride 

• Poor tube services to Uxbridge 

• Linkages between the Counties (Slough – High Wycombe, improved interchange) 



BEHAVIOUR SUPPORT PLAN 2004-5 ITEM 7 

SUMMARY 

Contact Officer: Christine Sullivan 

Telephone: 01895 256524 

Section 527A of the Education Act, 1996 places a duty on LEAs to prepare a statement 

setting out the arrangements for the education of children with behavioural difficulties, to be 

known as a Behaviour Support Plan. The first plan was produced for 1 April 1999 to be 

reviewed with a revised plan published by 1 April 2001. Thereafter it was intended that the 

plans be of 3 year duration. 

The government’s revised intention is for there to be one overarching education plan to 

replace the Education Development Plan, Inclusion SEN Strategy and Behaviour Support 

Plan to be known as the Single Education Plan (SEP). This will be phased in with all 

authorities by 2007. Hillingdon is currently in the tranche to complete by 2006 but in the 

interests of efficiency of planning has received agreement from the DfES to produce an early 

SEP by January 2005. 

Hence the Behaviour Support Plan, originally intended to be a 3 year plan will be for one 

year only, from 2004-5. It has been written to dovetail with the Community Plan, EDP 

activities, the Inclusion/ SEN Strategy Action Plan and the Child & Adolescent Mental Heath 

Strategy Action Plan. 

The DfES Improving Behaviour and Attendance Department has agreed that the plan be 

simplified to meet local needs and recognises it is a transition plan. Nonetheless it has 

requested that the Plan be submitted to the department by March 31 st 2004. 

The Draft Behaviour Support Plan 2004-5 is attached at Appendix 1. The Plan has been 

produced by a sub group of the Behaviour Forum, a multi-agency group whose terms of 

reference include monitoring and reviewing the Behaviour Support Plan and providing a 

mechanism for sharing and for coordinating planning relating to pupil behaviour across 

relevant strategic groups. The Forum is well attended by Education (officers and 

headteachers), Health, Social Services, Police and the Voluntary sector. Councillor Elaine 

Webb is a regular attendee. The draft plan has also been sent to all schools and governing 

bodies for comment. 

This Plan attempts to find a coherent way forward relating to provision for children with 

behaviour, emotional and social difficulties in a time of significant change and varied 

initiatives promoted by the DfES. Such developments include the Key Stage 3 Strategy 

Behaviour and Attendance Strand, the Primary Strategy Behaviour and Attendance pilot and 

the roll out of the Behaviour Improvement Programme (BIP) to the Hillingdon Excellence 

Cluster. In addition, the Green paper ‘Every Child Matters’ will result in national and local 

changes in children’s services which will affect the implementation of this plan and future 

planning for the SEP. 

Key priorities in the Plan are to: 

1. Review behaviour provision in Hillingdon. 

2. Implement DfES strategies relating to behaviour and attendance. 



3. Develop a coherent database system to support pupils with behaviour, 

emotional and social difficulties. 

4. Develop multi-agency initiatives to improve identification and support systems 

and target vulnerable pupils, improving their life chances. 

5. Develop a coherent network of support for parents in managing their children. 

6. Improve communication systems re behaviour initiatives. 

7. Provide more effective options for pupils at risk if exclusion. 

8. Promote emotional literacy within the authority to improve social inclusion and 

raise attainment. 

9. Develop early intervention initiatives with a proven evidence base for success. 

10. Develop a whole system approach for children and young people with 

behavioural, emotional and social difficulties. 

11. Integrate and assimilate the CAMH strategy and Behaviour Support Pla. 

12. Consider in depth other implications of the Green Paper, Every Child Matters, 

for pupils with BESD and create an action plan. 

13. Support the roll out of the Behaviour Improvement Programme (BIP) to the 

Excellence Cluster. 

The full Behaviour Support Plan is being circulated to Cabinet Members and 

Group Leaders and copies are available for inspection in Party Group Offices. 

Further copies are available on request to the Cabinet Office. 


That Cabinet endorses the Draft Behaviour Support Plan 2004-5. 


Officers have made this recommendation in order that LBH complies with the LEA duty to 

ensure it has coherent, comprehensive and well understood local procedures for tackling 

pupil behaviour and discipline problems that cover the full range of needs. It creates an 

opportunity for review of local provision and strategic planning to promote more effective use 

of resources. 

A key aspect of the legislation is the requirement for LEAs to consult all the relevant interests 

locally to promote more effective co-ordination. A list of consultees is on the report checklist 

attached. 


1. To approve the draft Behaviour Support Plan 2004-5 and require officers to 

implement its actions when fully signed; 

2. To suggest amendments as appropriate but taking into account the full 

consultation that has taken place with resulting amendments. 




The Education Overview and Scrutiny Committee has not asked to comment on this 

report. 

INFORMATION 

Legal 

As the Report sets out, the preparation of a Behaviour Support Plan is a statutory 

requirement placed on the LEA. The DfES has agreed to the LEA producing an early Single 

Education Plan by next January. The proposed Draft Behaviour Support Plan will therefore 

be for one year only and at the request of the DfES should be submitted to them by 31 

March 2004. As such there are no legal implications arising from this Report. 

Resource Implications: 

The Behaviour Support Plan sets out how different funding streams are used to 

deliver the aspirations in the plan, whether that be a retained budget, a devolved 

budget or an external funding source. The plan does not seek additional funding, but 

identifies priorities for how the existing funding is to be used. 

The Behaviour Support Plan sets out the funding available in section 4.4. It also 

comments on the role of funding for each of the key agencies and groups identified 

in section 5. 

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: 

Circular 1/98, LEA Behaviour Support Plans, Statutory Guidance, March 1998 

Behaviour Support Plans – Transitional arrangements, DfES communication, 

October 2003 



HILLINGDON LEA/ DFES COMPACT ITEM 8 

SUMMARY 

Contact Officer: Michael Dennison 

Telephone: 01895 277356 

In July 2003 Charles Clarke, Secretary of State for Education and Skills, and Sir 

Jeremy Beecham, Chair of the Local Government Association, signed a joint 

Statement of Intent to working in partnership to achieve better educational outcomes 

for children and young people. The statement sets out the shared vision for the 

educational system, a commitment to genuine partnership working and the education 

agenda for the coming academic years. It reflects the common understanding that 

educational objectives can best be pursued through a strong and productive 

relationship in which local authorities and the DfES support and respect each others’ 

contribution and work together on a shared agenda. 

To implement the Statement of Intent locally, each local education authority and the 

DfES will agree a Compact, setting out at a strategic level which of the authorities 

priorities are of short and medium term importance within that authority. It is 

expected that the local Compact will be signed by the Director and Lead Member for 

Education, on behalf of the authority, and by the Schools’ Directorate Adviser, on 

behalf of the DfES. This does not represent the signing of a new plan but rather the 

commitment to a working relationship. An outline has, therefore, been drafted and 

shared with the Adviser, as required by the DfES. 

Since EYL and schools in Hillingdon are embarking on forging a new working 

agreement which is aimed at defining the leadership and management of the 

education service to meet future requirements, it is essential that schools are 

engaged with and committed to the Compact the education authority signs with the 

DfES. EYL held a major conference with headteachers at the end of January to 

agree its future priorities for action. It was agreed with headteachers to incorporate 

the DfES/LEA Compact within the programme for the conference. For this reason 

Hillingdon has requested an extension before signing the Compact with the DfES. 

This was granted. 

The draft Compact is attached at Annex 1. The six key objectives reflect the priorities 

identified from the audit of the Education Development Plan 2002/2007 [which has 

previously been endorsed by Cabinet] and the Action Plan from the Vision and 

Values Conference held in September 2002. These have been widely discussed and 

agreed. The remaining elements were subject to further discussion and consultation 

with schools at the January conference and were finalised immediately afterwards to 

reflect fully the views of the headteachers. 


That Cabinet: 

1. Agrees the draft Compact attached at Annex 1. 



2. Requires officers to monitor the implementation of the Compact and 

submit a further report on progress in December 2004. 


Officers have made these recommendations in order that LBH complies with DfES 

requirements for local education authorities to develop and sign Compacts to 

achieve better educational outcomes for children and young people. 


1. To approve the draft Hillingdon LEA/ DfES Compact and require officers and 

advisers to implement its actions when finally signed; 

2. To suggest additional or alternative actions they would wish officers and 

advisers to implement. 


Because of the tight timescale for the creation, consultation and signing of the 

Compact, it has not been possible to include it on the agenda for the Education 

Overview and Scrutiny Committee. 

INFORMATION 

Hillingdon/DFES Compact 

1. During the Autumn 2003, each LEA had the opportunity to agree an individual 

Compact with the DfES setting out how they will work together, including the effort 

and resources each will commit to the local priorities requiring the most immediate 

attention. It is intended that this Compact will set out the LEA’s priorities for action 

over the next 18 months i.e. for the remainder of the current academic year and 

2004-5. 

2. DfES conferences were held in October to inform LEAs about the scope and 

expectations of Compacts. In addition, a meeting has been held between the EYL 

Corporate Director, EYL Lead Member, and the DfES Adviser with the Schools 

Directorate. Since EYL and schools in Hillingdon are embarking on forging a new 

working agreement for the education service, it is essential that schools were fully 

engaged with and committed to the Compact the education authority signs with the 

DfES. EYL held a major conference with headteachers at the end of January to 

agree its future priorities for action. It was agreed with headteachers to incorporate 

the DfES/LEA Compact within the programme. For this reason an extension before 

finally signing the Compact with the DfES was agreed with DfES. 

3. The key priorities for the local education authority over the next 18 months are 

set out as 6 objectives. The first 4 reflect the priorities already identified in EDP 2: 



• Inclusion through achievement – all schools 

• Inclusion through achievement – primary age pupils 

• Inclusion through achievement –secondary age pupils 

• Leading and managing learning. 

4. The other 2 objectives arose from the Action Plan from the Vision and Values 

Conference held in September 2002: 

• Mapping and managing diversity, excellence and choice; Building Schools for 

the future 

• Strategic Planning, collaboration and Best Value. 

LEGAL 

This report sets out the LEA’s continuing obligations to further the aim of school 

improvement and there are no legal implications arising from this report. 

RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: 

The Compact identifies what the LEA's priorities are and where resources will be 

targeted to support those priorities. It does not seek additional resources and, to that 

extent, there are no resource implications. 


DfES Guidelines for CEOs and Executive Members for Education and LEA Staff: 

“Compacts – Partnerships working to deliver shared priorities” 15/08/2003 



LONDON BOROUGH OF HILLINGDON 

LEA/DfES COMPACT 

2004-05 



HILLINGDON EDUCATION SERVICE & DFES COMPACT 

Hillingdon’s Compact with the DfES is set in the context of the Community Plan priorities, the Council’s corporate values and themes, the 

‘Education, Youth and Leisure priorities, the EDP2, Hillingdon Schools’ Improvement Plans and other related LEA statutory and service plans. 

Linked plans are identified in an appendix to this document. Relevant references to the Council’s Themes and Objectives are included in the 

Compact to indicate where contributions are being made. The Compact also takes account of the development of a Single Education Plan, 

proposed for 2005. 

This Compact comprises a shared agreement between the London Borough of Hillingdon and the DfES to work in partnership to achieve 

better educational outcomes for children and young people according to the National Statement of Intent for Partnership Working. Key, shared 

priorities are identified for the period from April 2004 to March 2005. 

The following 6 Priority Objectives in this Compact have been developed in close collaboration with LBH Elected Members, headteachers and 

representative governors. 

1. Inclusion through achievement: all pupils 

2. Inclusion through achievement: primary age pupils 

3. Inclusion through achievement: secondary age pupils 

4. Leading & managing learning 

5. Responding to diversity and providing excellence 

6. Strategic Planning, Collaboration, Building Schools for the Future & Best Value. 

These 6 Key Objectives have been subject to wide and effective consultation. Importantly, they were considered and the Key Actions 

developed further at the LEA’s partnership conference, ‘Remodelling Hillingdon’s Education Service’, that took place in January 2004. They 

coincide closely with the Director’s vision for schools, set out at the same conference. At this conference, the Priority Objectives were 

endorsed and specific activities were agreed, to be implemented through the EDP2, EYL Service and Team Plans. Targets are linked and 

referenced to statutory and other plans. 



Priority 

Objectives 

HILLINGDON EDUCATION SERVICE & DfES COMPACT 2004/05 

Hillingdon Targets and 

Outcomes 

Hillingdon Key Actions DfES Contribution Council and 

Community Plan 

Priorities 

1. 

Inclusion 

through 

Achievement: 

all pupils 

Targets Ref 

EDP2 targets 

Inclusion/SEN 

Strategy 

Data Sharing 

Protocol [IRT] 

Behaviour 

Support Plan 

Local PSA 

School 

Improvement 

Plans 

1a. 

Establish effective cross- service/ 

inter agency structures to focus on 

the needs of all children. 

1b. 

Meet EDP2 Priority 3 objective to 

provide effective education for all 

pupils, particularly those identified 

as most vulnerable and those at 

risk of underachieving. 

Implement effective strategies to improve the 

delivery of Children’s' Services across 

Education, Youth & Leisure (EYL), Social 

Services, Health and the Voluntary Sector 

Implement the Hillingdon Inclusion/SEN 

Strategy by establishing partnerships of 

schools, developing shared specialist 

provision and tackling exclusion together. 

Implement BSP actions aimed at improving 

behaviour and reducing exclusions, linked to 

Managed Moves initiative. 

Develop the use of pupil performance data 

with and across schools, at senior and 

middle management levels. 

Guidance following 

legislation from Green 

Paper ‘Every Child Matters’ 

Support funding through 

the Vulnerable Pupils' 

grant. 

Continued advice, support 

and Standards Fund 

through BIP, BSP and IRT 

programmes 

Learning & Culture 


1c. 

Improve the SEN provision and 

funding stream by minimising 

statements and out-Borough SEN 

provision and deploy budgets 

locally 

1d. 

Introduce single IRT structure for 

children across LBH services and 

Health 

Implement the Hillingdon Inclusion/SEN 

Strategy. Review partnerships and clusters of 

schools to share specialist provision 

effectively and reduce exclusions. 

Implement the actions from the agreed Data 

Sharing Protocol [draft Dec.2003], which 

provides guidance and responsibilities for 

partner organisations 

Provide support, advice, 

guidance and share 

examples of effective 

practice, including with the 

West London project 

review of SEN Transport 

funding. (Current activity 

with DfES) 

Remove current legislative 

barriers for the effective 

sharing of pupil-level 

information across services 

and agencies, as proposed 

in the Green Paper. 





Priority 

Objectives 

Hillingdon LEA Targets and 

Outcomes 

Hillingdon LEA Key Actions DfES Contribution Council and 


Priorities 

2. 

Inclusion 

through 

Achievement: 

primary age 

pupils 

Targets Ref. 

EDP2 targets 

Incl. No 

schools in 

OfSTED/LEA 

categories 

Inclusion/SEN 

Strategy 

EYDCP 

targets 

Local PSA 

2a. 

Improve performance of all children 

by at least two-thirds of a level 

each year [equivalent % ] , 

particularly LAC and other 

Underachieving Groups identified 

in EDP2 (2002 - 2007) at Key 

Stages 1 & 2 

2b. 

Improve performance of 

LAC/EOTAS, G&T & SEN groups 

of pupils at the end of Foundation 

Stage and Key Stages 1 & 2 

(including P level performance) 

2c. 

Continue to improve standards 

and provision for literacy, 

numeracy and ICT for all pupils in 

nursery and primary schools and 

achieve LEA KS2 targets for 

2004/5. 

Ensure that pupils in all Hillingdon 

primary schools are making good 

progress. 

Publish, analyse and monitor data on the 

performance of underachieving groups. 

Work with schools to develop and track the 

impact of targeted and effective teaching and 

learning strategies to improve the attainment 

of underachieving groups and share good 

practice 

Support the development of the EiC Cluster 

across Standards and Inclusion Services 

Targeted work with schools, groups and 

clusters of schools to develop and share 

effective ways of increasing the achievement 

of children looked after, gifted and talented 

and with SEN. 

Clarify Hillingdon’s Primary Strategy and 

service provision. 

Develop a Primary curriculum entitlement, 

reference to “Excellence and Enjoyment” to 

incorporating creativity, and citizenship 

Develop the use of pupil performance data in 

schools so that all make effective use of 

pupil-level information in order to drive up 

standards. 

Advice and support on the 

use and development of 

data with school senior and 

middle managers, including 

use of PAT. 

Brokering networks to 

develop and share 

effective strategies, 

particularly relating to key 

underachieving groups 

(SDA) 

Maintain EiC Cluster 

funding for the contractual 

period 

Support networking and 

sharing of good practice 

across London LEAs 

(SDA) 

Maintain Standards Funds 

for the Primary Strategy 

and NGfL, and support 

developments with the 

‘Excellence & Enjoyment’ 

Strategy. 

Regional director 

infrastructure provides 

continuing and flexible 

programmes according to 

agreed profile of need (RD) 






Priority 

Objectives 

School 

Improvement 

Plans 


Outcomes 

Ensure those schools in 

challenging circumstances are 

achieving at least to the level of 

"floor targets" and none is in 

OfSTED categories or causing 

concern. 



Priorities 

Expand programmes to support senior and 

middle management development in line with 

London Challenge and NCSL initiatives. 

2d. 

Further improve standards and 

quality of provision in Early Years 

Maintain and embed Early Years strategy as 

set out in the EYDCP and EDP2. 

Foundation stage profile to have compatibility 

with P levels to inform targets, track and 

measure attainment into KS1 

Provide guidance, 

materials and examples of 

good practice 




Priority 

Objectives 


Outcomes 

Hillingdon LEA Key Actions 

DfES 

Contribution 

Council and Community 

Plan 

Priorities 

3. 

Inclusion 

through 

Achievement: 

secondary 

age pupils 

Targets Ref. 

EDP2 Targets 

No schools 

below the floor 

target 

3a. 

Improve standards and quality of 

education at all levels at KS3 and 

achieve local PSA "stretch targets" 

for 2005 

Work with and across schools to target 

support through the Key Stage 3 strategy 

development and NGfL teams. 

Implement effective recruitment and retention 

teachers linked to the TTA initiatives to 

support recruitment and NRT support for 

Remodelling West London. 

Establish KS2–3 Transition project to ensure 

consistency of teaching and assessment for 

learning. 

Develop the use of pupil performance data in 

schools so that all make effective use of pupillevel 

information in order to drive up 

standards. 

Maintain Standards 

Funds for KS3 and 

NGfL. 

Regional director 

infrastructure 

provides continuing 

and flexible 

programmes 

according to agreed 

profile of need.(RD) 

Advice and support 

on the use and 

development of the 

London Schools 

Family data (London 

Challenge). 




Priority 

Objectives 


Outcomes 



Priorities 

No schools in 

OfSTED/LEA 

categories 

causing 

concern 

Local PSA 

BSP 

14-19 Strategy 

School 

Improvement 

Plans 

3b. 

Ensure that all Hillingdon secondary 

schools are making good progress. 

Ensure those in challenging 

circumstances are achieving at 

least to the level of "floor targets" 

and none is in OfSTED categories 

or causing concern. 

Standards and Inclusion services to provide 

targeted support to secondary schools below 

or near "floor targets" and/or in Amber or Red 

categories and focused support for school 

senior and middle management with schools. 

Build on the good practice and effective 

management in Hillingdon secondary schools 

[Beacon, Leading Edge, Specialist, Training 

College, City Academy etc] to share good 

practice and drive up standards. 

Expand programmes to support senior and 

middle management development in line with 

London Challenge and NCSL initiatives 

Work in close liaison with 

the LEA and link with LEA 

strategy, to provide 

continued and well coordinated 

support and 

funding from LIG, 

Academies, EiC, 

Excellence in Cities and 

London Challenge Advisers 

and developments. 

Use of NRT to support local 

development of 

Remodelling Strategy. 

Support and monitor 

progress (SDA.) 


3c. 

Improve advice and guidance for 

young people and reduce NEETs 

by 10% by 2005 

Develop 14 -19 strategy aimed at enhancing 

curriculum provision, increasing access and 

participation and raising standards 

Support for developing Pan 

London links and vocational 

options through the LSC 

(London Challenge) 


3d. 

Develop student voice and active 

citizenship in line with London 

Challenge priorities 

Expand and enhance the Healthy Hillingdon 

Schools programme to focus on the 

development of School Councils and the 

active engagement of students. 

Opportunities through the 

London Challenge. 




Priority 

Objectives 


Outcomes 



Priorities 

4. 

Leading & 

Managing 

Learning 

Targets Ref. 

4a. 

Establish Hillingdon Curriculum 

Entitlement for each Key Stage to 

incorporate ‘Excellence and 

Enjoyment’, Citizenship etc. 

Review curriculum documents to incorporate 

breadth, balance, innovation, creativity, 

Citizenship. 

Develop a targeted CPD programme to 

integrate the new curriculum at each Key 

Stage. 

Advice and guidance from 

relevant DfES curriculum 

strategy teams. 


progress (SDA). 


EDP2 targets 

HGfL Strategy 

WRS Action 

Plan 

4b. 

Continue to develop and improve 

school leadership and management 

so that 80% of schools’ leadership 

and management are good or 

better. 

Develop a cohesive programme for Middle 

Management development, based on Leading 

from the Middle. 

Expand and enhance programmes to support 

senior and middle management development 

in line with London Challenge and NCSL 

initiatives. 

Maintain support through 

LIG, Primary Leadership 

Programme, training and 

funding, London Challenge 

& Academy Adviser support 

and develop CPD through 

London Leadership Centre 

Encourage continuous 

improvement culture 

Recruitment 

Strategy 

4c. 

Develop and enhance the 

curriculum through ICT and 

opportunities offered through 

broadband technology. 

Focus on programmes to improve induction, 

mentoring and CPD – with schools as 

providers. 

Establish and embed the benefits of HGfL and 

provide effective joint management with 

schools. 

Maintain funding for NGfL 

development and provide 

on-line assessment for ICT 

Provide guidance, material 

and good practice networks 




Priority 

Objectives 


Outcomes 



Priorities 

4d. 

Recruit, retain and maintain the 

provision of high quality staff and 

governors 

Maintain and expand the programmes for 

R&R at local level, to build on the ALCEO 

initiatives. 

Workforce Remodelling Strategy (WRS) 

implemented, developed and monitored. 

Maintain DfES funding for 

WRS and links with 

TTA funding for RSM 

function (NRT) 

Retain and recruit high 

performing people 

Develop a strategy to recruit governors and 

improve the quality and effectiveness of 

governing bodies. 

4e. 

Embed effective self-evaluation 

and Performance Management in 

schools and the LEA 

Enhance the Annual School Review for all 

schools to emphasise the supported selfevaluation 

element and enabling schools to 

work towards the OfSTED S4. 

Support for the 

development of selfevaluation 

and monitor the 

impact. (SDA) 

Manage performance for 

improvement 

Support and promote effective Performance 

Management through programmes for staff 

and governors. 

Establish the National Standards for School 

Improvement Services as the basis for service 

specification with schools. 

Develop the Annual School Review to further 

enhance the role of school leaders. 



Priority 

Objectives 


Outcomes 



Priorities 

5. 

Responding 

to diversity 

and providing 

excellence 

Targets Ref. 

EDP2 targets 

School 

Organisation 

Plan 

Community 

Plan 

5a. 

Strategy jointly agreed with 

Hillingdon schools for promoting 

and disseminating excellence and 

diversity 

5b. 

Develop the community dimension 

of schools including extended 

schools and full service schools 

Support and promote applications for 

Specialist status, Leading Edge, Chartermark, 

IiP, Achievement Awards, Curriculum Awards, 

etc and develop City Academies, as 

appropriate. 

Exploit and build on the effective extended 

schools practice in some schools to develop 

pilot programmes with LBH through the 

extended & full service schools programme, 

developing aspects identified in the Green 

Paper ‘Every Child Matters’ regarding 

provision of local community services . 


Specialist College, Leading 

Edge and Academies 

teams. 

Advice and support with 




extended and full services 

schools teams and on 

developing full service 

provision and community 

service provision as an 

integral part of raising 

achievement, increasing 

inclusion and lifelong 

learning. 


Working in partnership with 

community and partners 

5c. 

Establish effective sharing of good 

practice across partnerships and 

phases. 

Develop and implement strategy from the 

January 2004 ‘Remodelling Hillingdon’s 

Education Service’ conference between the 

LEA, school headteachers and representative 

governors. 

Monitoring of progress 

(SDA). 

Support through London 

Challenge and DfES 

collaborative networking 

projects and developments, 

good practice websites, 

publications and materials. 

(e.g. LIG, Federations, 

Innovations Unit) 




Support and monitoring 

(SDA) 



Priority 

Objectives 


Outcomes 



Priorities 

6. 

Strategic 

Planning, 

Collaboration, 

Building 

Schools for 

the Future 

and Best 

Value 

Targets Ref. 

Corporate 

Plan/CPA Plan 

Milestones 

EDP Targets 

for 

development 

of SEP 

Post Ofsted 

Action Plan 

6a. 

Improved CPA rating to achieve 3* 

rating for Education by 2005 

Schools improve by 1 grade for 

VFM on re-inspection by OfSTED 

6b. 

Improve Strategic Planning rating 

in Audit Commission Annual Survey 

of Schools into next quartile by 

2005 

6c. 

Review the mechanisms for 

decision-making and 

communication with schools to 

improve the level of joint leadership 

6d. 

Hillingdon schools to engage in the 

development and enhancement of 

partnerships by 2005. 

6e. 

Rationalise and refocus the 

‘Education, Youth and Leisure’ 

services planning through the 

development of the SEP 

LEA will develop its planning and consultation 

procedures 

Develop rigorous and systematic selfevaluation 

against the Ofsted LEA Inspection 

JRSs. 

Implement Action Plan from Headteacher 

Conference [January 2004] to review the 

Strategic Advisory Groups and reduce the 

number of standing groups involving 

headteachers. 

Implement recommendations from Hillingdon 

Collaboration Project (Mouchel) as agreed 

with HTs at the January 2004 Conference 

Reduce number of meetings and improve 

quality of decision-making and 

communication. 

Audit existing clusters and partnerships and 

ensure all schools have access to 

collaborative support in line with SIP priorities; 

develop and disseminate the work with all 

schools through the Hillingdon 

Collaboration[Mouchel] Project. 

Draft SEP across all EYL Services to ensure 

greater coherence of planning 


relevant DfES teams. 

Advice and monitoring of 

progress ( SDA.) 

Advice and monitoring of 




Publish good practice 

networks on learning 

partnerships on the web 



Use SEP website and 

examples of good practice 

to inform development of 

SEP. 

SDA and SEP policy team 

support for endorsement 

Provide excellent services 

to community and 

customers; 

Manage finance and 

assets effectively 

Encourage continuous 

improvement culture 

Plan and prioritise 

effectively 



Modernise Council 

processes 

Plan and prioritise 

effectively 



REVIEW OF WELFARE MEALS SERVICE, MEALS 

IN THE HOME, DINING CENTRE, DAY CENTRE 

MEALS AND CIVIC CENTRE BANQUETING 

SERVICE 

ITEM 9 

Contact Officers: Jeremy Ambache/Steve Smith 

Telephone: 01895 27727401895 250518 

SUMMARY 

This report sets out the progress made since the last report to Cabinet on 18 th 

December 2003. 

Following the recommendations from Cabinet, to explore Options 3a and 3b, Officers 

have set out a programme to market test ‘Meals in the Home Services’ and 

Banqueting Services. 


That Members note the progress made in market testing the meals and 

banqueting services. 


The Cabinet requested an update to be presented to this meeting. 


None at this stage 

COMMENTS OF OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 

The Committee has not asked to comment on the report. 

INFORMATION 

1. A project group (comprising managers of the services, commissioning and 

procurement staff), has been set up to meet the requirements of the market testing. 

2. To ensure compliance with European legislation an advertisement was placed in 

the Official Journal of the European Union in February and notification of our 

intentions to market test was placed in both the local and trade press. 

3. In accordance with legislation 37 days is required for this purpose and for 

expressions of interest to made back to the London Borough of Hillingdon. All 



expressions of interest are due to be returned to the Council by 23 rd March 2004. An 

evaluation of the questionnaire responses will then be made. 

4. An invitation to tender will be made to suitable contractors and they will be 

provided with the specification and contract conditions. This is planned to 

commence in April 2004, and tenders will be returned to the authority by the end of 

May 2004. 

5. A panel will then be set up to evaluate the tenders. Suitable companies will be 

interviewed and invited to present their proposals to the Council. Information in 

respect of the outcome of the tender evaluation exercise will then be reported to 

Cabinet in September 2004. This will include an assessment of the TUPE 

implications. 

6. It is proposed that a three-year contract, commencing in January 2005, with an 

option to extend is sought. 


Legal Implications 

7. The various stages of the procurement process are outlined in the body of the 

report. At this stage, there is nothing further that can be added by way of legal 

comments. 

Finance Implications 

8. There are no financial implications from this report. Social Services’ Procurement 

Manager is involved in the project team and will ensure that the prescribed format for 

responses to the Invitation to Tender will enable all bids to be evaluated on a 

consistent basis. 


Report to Cabinet 18 th December 2003 

Meals Review Committee Report to Social Services 19 th March 2002 

Report on Asha Day Centre Users Petition 13 th September 2001 



EARLY YEARS DEVELOPMENT AND CHILDCARE 

PARTNERSHIP IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2004/05 

ITEM 10 

Contact Officer: Roger Turner/Alison Booth 

Telephone: 01895 250789/01895 277348 

SUMMARY 

The Hillingdon Early Years Development and Childcare Partnership (EYDCP) has 

been working together on the 2004-06 Early Years Development and Childcare 

Partnership Implementation Plan. Three years ago the Government (DfES/Sure 

Start) and Members approved fully the EYDCP strategic Plan 2001-04 and this time 

last year the Implementation Plan for 2003-04 received full approval. The current 

Implementation Plan has been guiding the work of the Partnership and considerable 

progress has been achieved during the last year. Although Sure Start no longer 

require submission of a Plan, they have specified a number of priority areas for the 

focus of the EYDCP’s work during the 2 years 2004-06. This plan is a 2 year plan, to 

run parallel with the 2 year funding allocation for 2004-06 that has already been 

agreed with the Sure Start Unit. This report, together with the Implementation Plan, 

provides Members with the details contained in the new plan for its consideration. 

A full copy of the Plan is available to any Member who wishes to access a copy. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

That members: 

1. Note the achievements made in response to the targets set out in the 

current Plan (03-04); 

2. Approve the proposals set out in the new Plan (04-06); 


To ensure that the Partnership contributes appropriately and strategically to national 

and local targets to ensure high quality childcare and early education provision in 

Hillingdon and thus the continuance of £3.1M external funding from Sure Start for 

2004-06. 

OPTIONS 

1. To approve the plan for 2004-06; 

2. To approve the plan for 2004-06, with modifications 

3. To not approve the plan for 2004-06. Were this option to be considered the 

EYDCP would be unable to drawn down funding from the Government. 




Education, Libraries and Arts Overview and Scrutiny Committee have provided no 

comments. 

INFORMATION 

1. During 2003-04 the DfES/Sure Start required the EYDCP to set targets in 14 

areas in its Implementation Plan for 2003-04. All of these areas of working are 

reflected in the 2004-06 plan that follows the same format as the Sure Start Delivery 

Guidance 2004-2006. 

Free Early Education for 3 Year Olds 

2. Through partnership between maintained school nursery places, day nurseries, 

playgroups and independent schools Hillingdon has established a position of 

providing free early education for all three year-old children who live, and are 

educated, within Hillingdon borders. This resulted in an early achievement of the 

Sure Start target to provide universal provision by eighteen months. 

3. The School Standards and Framework Act has placed a duty on local authorities 

to provide free early education for all four year-old children at point of delivery from 

1998. This Act has now been extended to include all three year-old children. 

Funding for this element of education will be within the Education Formula Funding 

from April 2004. 

Expansion of Childcare Places 

4. Despite substantial barriers to the attainment of the targets set in the 2001-04 

strategic plan, for example:- 

• Change of national regulator (OfSTED) and to national regulations (Care 

Standards); 

• Lack of suitable premises; 

• National shortage of suitably qualified workers. 

5. Good progress has been made towards the target for 03-04 and, in the 9 months 

to December 2003, 70% of the target for the creation of childcare places has been 

achieved. Comparison between target and actual performance over 3 and 1 year 

are as follows:- 

Area of expansion 

Revised 

target 

01-04 

Actual 

performance 

01-Dec 03 

Target 

2003-04 

Performance Apr 

03-Dec 03 

Out of School 

985 798 370 183 

childcare 

Pre-school childcare 444 543 152 186 

Childminding places 1471 1203 579 311 

Total 2900 2544 1101 739 



6. Funding of £72,000 has been secured to help providers towards the cost of 

starting up new schemes. Expressions of interest in bidding for the funding resulted 

in 3 responses and funding is likely to be given to providers starting clubs at Colham 

Manor, Hayes Park Primary and Charville Schools. 

Recruitment 

7. 2 fundays have been held in Harefield and Northwood to which over 2,000 

parents and children attended. The events resulted in increased interest in 

childminding and working in the early years and childcare sector. In total, 169 

people have expressed a strong interest in working in the sector since April 2003. 

8. The EYDCP will continue to offer a startup package of £100 to all newlyregistering 

childminders. 

Training 

9. The strategic target for 2003-04 is for 400 childcare workers to receive 

qualifications based training. This has been exceeded and 547 childcare workers 

have accessed qualifications based training funded through the Childcare Grant and 

European Social Funding. The strategic target for a total of 1,200 workers to receive 

training by 2004 has been met and exceeded by 2003. The target for 2004-05 

reflects the increased demand for training and has been raised to 250 workers to be 

75% funded for level 2 and level 3 courses and to provide 375 non-qualifications 

childcare training places. The target is the same for 2005-06. 

10. The strategic target for 2003-04 is to provide the equivalent of four days training 

per Foundation Stage practitioner (staff in school nurseries, playgroups, day 

nurseries and independent schools) during the year. This target was reached 

through the provision of over seventy short courses. From April 2003 to February 

2004, 733 practitioners had attended the training events that have been provided. 

The course programme has been funded through European Social Funding and a 

direct grant from the DfES. The EYDCP is required to provide this level of 

Foundation Stage training over the next two years. DfES funding will be available to 

support the coming training programmes. 

11. The EYDCP were required to deliver the equivalent of 3 days training per setting 

Special Education Needs Coordinator (SENCO) over the last 3 years (2001-2004). 

The implementation of this target was to provide one days training per setting 

SENCO in each of the three years. This was achieved this year through the 

provision of approximately eighteen training events, and last year included modular 

SENCO courses that will hopefully be accredited in the spring of 2004. From April 

2003 to February 2004 185 participants have attended the 18 courses that have 

been provided. This year’s course programme has been funded through a direct 

DfES grant. Funding for training will be continued for the next two years. 



Quality in Early Education 

12. Grants have been paid to childminders, all full daycare, sessional and out of 

school providers to enable them to purchase and renew equipment to raise quality 

throughout the sector. A quality childminding network is being developed in 

collaboration with Sure Start in Hayes and it is hoped that this will receive 

accreditation by Spring 2004. 

13. The Partnership have made good progress in the promotion of quality 

accreditation schemes and 1 provider has attained accreditation and an additional 23 

providers have been recruited this year making a total of 40 providers and 

childminders who are now fully or part funded to work towards quality accreditation. 

The target for 15% of providers (20) to be working towards QA accreditation set for 

2003-04 has been exceeded by 13. Support groups and workshops have been 

established to support providers through the process and staff in the Partnership 

have received training to enable them to provider mentoring support. 

14. As of February 2004 there will be a team of 3.5 Early Years Advisory Teachers, 

working alongside the LEA Early Years Adviser, to support the development of 

quality within early education provision in all sectors catering for the education of 

children between the ages of three and five years. This development is supported 

through in-setting support, pre and post OfSTED inspection support and 

dissemination of good practice through twinning schools and non-maintained 

providers, arranging visits to settings with recognised good practice, good practice 

guidelines and newsletters. 

15. During the autumn term of 2003 the Early Years Team provided support to 

ninety-nine settings to develop a wide range of aspects of Foundation Stage 

education. The twinning initiative now twins a total of ten schools and thirty settings 

and with the implementation of the visits initiative it is hoped that the dissemination of 

good practice and partnership working will continue to be enhanced. 

Special Educational Needs and Equal Opportunities 

16. With the recruitment of two Inclusion Facilitators, to work in partnership with the 

Inclusion Advisers recruited in 2003, the target of providing practitioner and SENCO 

support to all non-maintained Foundation Stage settings on a ratio of one to twenty, 

has been achieved. The Inclusion Team provides support to practitioners to enable 

them to cater for children’s individual and significant needs. They also support 

providers to develop inclusive practice and effective policies including those 

regarding children with special educational needs and those learning English as an 

additional language. 

17. During the autumn term of 2003 the Inclusion Team supported thirty settings in 

developing practice to cater for individual children’s needs alongside supporting eight 

children transferring from non-maintained settings to school provision. The Inclusion 

Team are also in the process of developing a “Behaviour Pack” that will support 

practitioners in developing positive behaviour strategies that will ensure children’s 

positive self-image is maintained 



18. The Children’s Information Service has expanded its outreach programme and 

attended 32 outreach events, of which 14 were targeted at hard to reach groups. 

19. A Directory of Children’s Services is currently being compiled in collaboration 

with the Hillingdon Association of Voluntary Services, Social Services, Education and 

Health. Funding of just under £8,000 for the next 2 years for the continuation of this 

project has been obtained from the Children’s Fund. 

FINANCE 

20. The plan is mainly concerned about the priorities for spending secured levels of 

funding, whether that be base budget or external grant. In two regards, however, 

additional budget will be required for 2004/05 and this is being considered as part of 

the EYL budget overall and the Schools Budget in particular. 

21. The policy of providing free early education for 3 Year Olds will have a cost in 

2004/05 which is calculated to be £85k more than the rolled forward budget. Also, 

the operation of the 3 Early Years Centres may cause budget pressures of up to 

£173k. Both of items fall within the Schools Budget and are included in the 

calculation for passporting the increase in the Formula Spending Share for Schools. 

22. The funding for this is to be considered as part of the report to Cabinet on Fair 

Funding arrangements for schools in 2004/05. 

LEGAL 

23. There are no legal implications arising from this Report. 


Employment Service 

Children’s Fund 

Sure Start 

Neighbourhood Nursery 

Parents 

Providers of early education and childcare 


Nil 



REVENUE BUDGET 2003/04 MONTHLY 

MONITORING REPORT MONTH 9 (DECEMBER 

2003) 

ITEM 11 

Contact Officer: Paul Whaymand 

Telephone: 01895 556074 

INTRODUCTION 

This report sets out the overall financial position of the authority as forecast at the 

end of month 9 of 2003/04 (December 2003). It shows separately the forecast yearend 

position on Directorates’ Budgets, centrally managed Corporate Budgets and 

the overall position in relation to the General Fund and surplus balances. The report 

also includes reports of Corporate Directors commenting on the forecast year-end 

position on their budgets and on any significant budget pressures during the year 

and actions taken to mitigate their effect. The previous report to Cabinet in February 

covered the forecast position as at month 8 (November). 

This report provides a strategic summary of financial performance to date. It reflects 

the budget monitoring and management within Directorates. More detailed 

information for individual Directorates is available from Heads of Finance. 

SUMMARY 

This report on revenue monitoring as at Month 9, December 2003, shows that 

forecast net expenditure for the year is £829k lower than the budget, leading to 

£1.829m being added to balances as opposed to the £1m budgeted. This is an 

improvement of £101k compared to the month 8 projected underspend of £728k. 

This change has been generated by a £101k improvement in the forecasts across 

Directorates. The main factor in the improved position within the Directorate spend is 

an improvement of £173k in the projected overspend for Housing Benefits. 

The current forecast assumes that the Development Contingency is fully utilised. At 

present £703k is uncommitted – of this, it is anticipated that up to £120k could be 

required to support the HIP programme, leaving a balance of £583k which could be 

added to balances. 

The forecasts for month 9 exclude £1.25m of additional costs relating to the Asylum 

Judicial Review. It has been assumed that this sum will be recoverable from central 

government, as have £1.9m of overhead costs relating to the Asylum Seeker Service 

in the year. 


That Cabinet notes the improved position of the revenue budget and agrees to 

officers continuing to take appropriate actions to ensure the budgeted revenue 

surplus for the current year is achieved. 




To achieve the Council’s expected surplus in line with the approved budget. 

EXPENDITURE FORECASTS 

Directorates’ Forecast Expenditure 

1. Table 1 shows Budget, Forecast and Variance at Directorate level now reported 

and the total position on the Directorates’ budgets 

Table 1 

2003/04 

Original 

Budget 

Budget 

changes 

(Note 1) 

2003/04 

Current 

Budget 

(as at 

Month 9) 

Directorate 2003/04 

Forecast 

(as at 

Month 9) 

Variances (+=Extra spend or 

Less Income )/() indicate less 

costs or greater income 

Variance 

(As at 

Month 9) 

Variance Variance 

(as at (as at 

Month 8) Month 

6) 

£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 

Education Youth & 

141,134 6,055 147,189 Leisure 147,189 0 0 0 

68,211 3,442 71,653 Social Services 71,668 +15 (23) (2) 

27,835 1,413 29,248 Environment 29,360 +112 +106 +140 

8,219 635 8,854 Housing 8,272 (582) (456) (148) 

11,855 290 12,145 Central Services 10,931 (1,214) (1,195) (62) 

32,632 - 

Capital charges (all 

32,632 Services – Note 2) 32,632 0 0 0 

Directorates' 

289,886 11,835 301,721 Expenditure 300,052 (1,669) (1,568) (72) 

Note 1 

“Budget Changes” incorporates allocations from the inflation provision and the 

Development and Risk Contingency which are further detailed in paragraphs 64 and 

65 respectively. 

The changes also reflect budget transfers between Directorates to accommodate: 

• Allocation of £300k savings target agreed at council budget meeting, Pro-rata 

across all services. 

• Central services charges allocation of £806k directly to relevant units. 

• Centralising of payment staff from Directorates - £75k (EYL & ESG) 

• Allocation of £400k of corporate provision for increased employer’s pension 

contributions. 



• £5k virement to Education from Central Services for town twinning. 

Note 2 

In Table 1 above, capital charges have been removed from Directorate budgets and 

shown separately to focus on the budget quantum which is within each Directorate’s 

control. 

2. The budgetary position for each Directorate is as follows: 

Education Youth & Leisure (EYL): 

3. EYL is projecting a £120k overspend on a number of budget heads as 

summarised below, with an expectation that they will be contained within the 

approved budget. This represents a £14k net improvement on the month 8 position 

before compensating savings: 

Forecast 

month 9 

£’000 

Change from 

month 8 

£’000 

Finance & Resources +228 +143 

Standards and Inclusion (245) (123) 

Lifelong learning +30 (30) 

Cultural Services +107 (4) 

Compensating Savings (120) +14 

Overall 0 0 

Finance and Resources: - £228k Overspend 

4. There are three areas of pressure in this budget. The first is in Premature 

Retirement Compensation, where current known commitments will result in an 

overspend of £162k (£137k worsening on £25k reported in month 8). The additional 

costs appear to be in the Teachers Pension Agency liability and some improvements 

need to be made to the way in which this aspect of the budget is forecasted in future. 

The second is in the Finance Team where recruitment difficulties have required the 

use of agency staff, currently estimated to cost in the region of £45k (£15k increase 

from £30k reported in month 8). The third relates to bills for legal costs, where LBH 

has either lost cases or has settled out of court (c£21k). This represents an 

improvement of £9k on the month 8 position. 

5. In the event of vacancy management across the group not producing savings to 

cover these pressures, the fall-back position would be to assess the scope to use or 

re-phase spending on asset management planning reports and the next stage of 

consultancy work for Ruislip High School PFI. In the event of these not being 

achievable, an overspend would result. 



Standards and Inclusion :- £245k Underspend 

6. After virements from central Standards Fund budgets to support SEN budgets 

and finalisation of prior year inter-authority liabilities for SEN, the SEN position is 

now forecasting an underspend of £111k (£11k worsening on the £122k reported in 

month 8). These forecasts include assumptions about new SEN placements. A 

review of SEN support services budgets has identified underspends of £133k in 

staffing budgets that were not forecast in previous months. These underspends arise 

due to failure to fill posts, where previously it was assumed that they would be filled, 

for Pupil & Family Support (£73) and Learning and Support Services (£60). 

Lifelong Learning: £30k Overspend 

7. The Early Years and Childcare team has identified budget pressures (£130k), due 

to underachievement of income targets (principally) in the three Early Years Centres, 

which transferred from Social Services on 1st April 2003 . These budgets are 

regarded as high risk and are being considered each month. There are some 

offsetting savings within the Early Years Team and these will reduce the overspend 

for the team to between £50k and £100k. Overall projected position is a £30k 

improvement on that forecast on month 8. 

8. EYL officers are looking to identify strategies for ensuring that, in the longer term, 

these facilities operate within their approved budget. This is unlikely to produce a 

balance in 2003/04. Officers have sought some support from the Council's 

Contingency Budget, which earmarked up to £40k of funding in the event of the Early 

Years Centres being unable to meet income targets. Other opportunities for savings 

in this area are modest and an overspend may be inevitable. 

Cultural Services: £107k Overspend 

9. Cost pressures and income shortfall at Hayes Pool (£90k) and a mixture of 

pressures and savings elsewhere in the Leisure budget (ie projected income shortfall 

of £11k at Cwm Pennant offset by a forecast increase in rent income on golf courses 

(£42k), under-achievement of income at Queensmead Sports Centre (£25k), cost 

pressures at Minet Country Park (£25K), and a range of modest ups and downs for 

the remainder). There are some offsetting pressures and savings within the Library 

Service. 

10. These pressures are expected to be managed within Cultural Services. The 

scope for doing this is in uncommitted funding for an Asset Management Review 

Manager and some opportunities for vacancy management. Savings have been 

identified by Cultural Services managers. 

Compensating Savings (Provisions): - (£120k) Underspend 

11. The latest assessment of potential compensating savings suggests that the 

following would appear to be achievable: 



AMR project director: 

Schools asset management: 

Vacancy management: 

Total: 

£’000 

70 

15 

35 

120 

Social Services: 

12. The Social Services overall projection indicates a slight worsening of £38k since 

the underspend of £23k projected at Month 8. As Social Services continue to 

examine and confirm management information through the commitments review 

exercise they are producing more reliable data on which to forecast commitments. 

The main changes this month are increase in the pressure on Children and families 

Service (£14k), Older People’s Services (£67k), mental health services (£25k), 

support services(£21k) and a reduction in the pressure on Physical and Sensory 

Disability Services by £47k, and in learning difficulties £38k. The forecast excludes 

the expected costs in this year of Asylum Seeker Judicial Review cases (£1.25m) 

and continues to assume full recovery of £1.9m of overhead costs regarding the 

Asylum Seeker service. The pressures are detailed in the table below: 

Forecast 

Variance 

Month 9 

£’000 

Change from 

Month 8 

£’000 

Children and Families +1,498 +14 

Asylum Seeker Service (1,114) 0 

Older People's Services (190) +67 

Physical & Sensory Disabilities +909 (47) 

Learning Disabilities +620 (38) 

Mental Health Services +401 +25 

Other Adult Services (36) (4) 

Support Services (434) +21 

Unallocated Growth (realignment) (1,639) 0 

+15 +38 

13. The extent of fluctuation in variances is reducing as the work on analysing all 

Private & Voluntary placement commitments nears completion. The forecast 

methodology has been significantly improved and is now more reliable. This has 

resulted in a revised projection of a £15k overspend for the department overall, 

excluding the developing impact of judicial review asylum cases. This compares with 

a £23k underspend projected in Month 8. 

14. Care Package authorisations procedures have been tightened to provide senior 

management scrutiny to all future higher cost placements for the foreseeable future. 

Heads of Service are continuing to review all proposals over £25k per year before a 

placement is made. The findings from the Budget Realignment exercise are helping 

budget managers to manage costs more effectively. The policy for the rest of this 

year is to contain costs overall within a departmental cash limit, since the current 



service limits are unrealistic. The realignment exercise has informed the 2004/05 

budget building. 

Children & Families: - £1,498k overspend 

15. The projected overspend has increased by £14k due to clearer forecasting. All 

high cost care package proposals are referred to the Head of Service for review 

before a placement can be made. 

Asylum Seeker Service: - (£1,114k) underspend 

16. No change on Month 8. The underspend is additional grant income which has 

been claimed to cover management, support and overheads costs which have been 

the subject of challenge by the Audit Commission. This projection assumes full 

recovery of the claim. All claimable costs will be budgeted under the Asylum service 

cost centre for 2004/05, to show the real impact of the service and the extent to 

which it is reimbursed by grants. 

Older people’s Services: - (£190k) underspend 

17. An increase of £67k in spend since Month 8, due to continued efforts to reduce 

the waiting list. Commitments are being monitored in the context of the overall 

departmental financial position. 

Physical & Sensory Disabilities: - £909k overspend 

18. This has reduced by £47k since Month 8 due to firmer forecasting as the year 

progresses. All high cost care package proposals are to be referred to the Head of 

Service for review before a placement can be made. 

Learning Disabilities: - £620k overspend 

19. A reduction £38k since Month 8 due to firmer forecasting. All high cost care 

package proposals are to be referred to the Head of Service for review before a 

placement can be made. 

Mental Health: - £401k overspend 

20. This has increased by £25k due mainly to clarification of the impact of staff 

harmonisation costs. All high cost care package proposals are to be referred to the 

Head of Service for review before a placement can be made. 

Support Services: - (£434k) underspend 

21. The underspend has reduced by £21k since Month 8 due to a £21k reduction in 

projected CareFirst costs offset by an overspend of £42k on a shortfall in PCT 

contribution to the Equipment Service. The projected underspending on these 

services is being used to manage the department's budgets overall within the total 

cash limit. 



Unallocated Growth (Realignment): - (£1,639k) underspend 

22. There is no change since the last report. This is a reserve of £1,639k of 

budgetary growth and inflation in the current year which has been with held from 

budgets pending a realignment of budgets for 2004/05 to reflect actual patterns of 

spend. The budget will be dispersed to service budgets as part of 2004/05 budget 

build. This will not address the structural budget issues within services in the current 

year. Group budgets will continue to be managed by the department to aim to 

deliver an outturn on target overall. The realignment analysis will now form the basis 

for re-shaped budgets for 2004/05. 

Environmental Services: 

23. A projected overspend of £112k is reported. This is a worsening of £6k on the 

£106k reported in month 8. This is due to a new pressure in the CCTV service in 

relation to maintenance and cable line rental. The position is summarised below: 

Forecast 

month 9 

£’000 

Change from 

month 8 

£’000 

Public Health & Environmental 

6 6 

Services 

Highways & Transport 50 0 

Support Services 56 0 

Total 112 6 

Public Health & Environmental Services: - £6k overspend 

24. £6k CCTV Service. Pressure from increased maintenance and cable line rental 

costs. The CCTV manager is reviewing the current arrangements for the internal 

recharges of costs and also looking at opportunities to attract external funding to 

support this important 24-hour service. 

Highways & Transport: - £50k overspend 

25. Income from contract parking in multi storey car parks has not yet been 

achieved, hence there is an income shortfall. Officers continue to seek negotiated 

agreements with potential contract users. 

Support Services: - £56k overspend 

26. Demand for the Customer Contact Centre has been higher than expected, and 

the success of the service has generated yet more calls. The existing over-spend 

has arisen because of the need to employ additional staff to deal with the increased 

number of calls taken to meet performance indicators and deal with peaks and 

troughs in demand. The Council intends to extend the present CCC to all Council 

services, and the costs and budgetary position of the larger CCC will depend upon 

the detailed arrangements for the new service. 



27. The budget pressure has recently been reduced due to a contribution from 

'green waste'. The Corporate Director is actively seeking ways in which to make 

compensatory savings to reduce this pressure further. Officers from ESG and 

Corporate Finance are seeking to capitalise some of the staff salaries within the 

Contact Centre who are working on the introduction of the new Contact Centre 

software. A significant reduction in the total overspend is expected in the next 

reporting period. The Contact Centre is due to transfer to Corporate IT in early 

March. 

Housing Services: 

28. Housing Services are now showing a projected underspend of £582k a £126k 

improvement on the month 8 projected underspend of £456k. This is due to an 

decrease in the forecast overspend on benefits, offset by an increase in the forecast 

overspend on Housing development, as detailed in the table below: 

Forecast 

month 9 

£’000 

Changes from 

month 8 

£’000 

Benefits 320 (173) 

Homelessness (859) (21) 

Caravan Site (8) (2) 

Housing Advice Centre (52) (7) 

Housing Private Sector (59) (3) 

Housing Development 34 68 

Housing Careline Services 24 2 

Other Housing Services 18 10 

(582) (126) 

Benefits: - £320k overspend 

29. Benefits is made up of three key services - Benefit Admin, Benefits Payments 

and Fraud Prevention and Overpayment Recoveries; further details of these items 

are provided below. The net overspend has reduced from £493k in period 8 to £320k 

in period 9 and this is mainly due to movements in the cost of payments and 

administration. Net cost of payment is down by £174k and Admin costs are up by 

£170k. The total £320k projected net overspend to year-end is made up of £220k 

overspend on admin costs; £341k overspend on payments to claimants; and £241k 

underspend as a result of increased overpayment collections. The gross expenditure 

for Benefit is £53m+, £320k is less than 1% of the gross expenditure. 

30. There is a monthly review of the service to monitor both service and financial 

performance. All the actions listed for each aspect of the service are reviewed and 

updated each month. 

31. Admin: - The projected overspend on admin has moved from £55k overspend 

in period 8 to £220k overspend in period 9. This is mainly due to increased support 

costs allocations and the need to increase staffing levels in order to maintain 



performance and implement i-world. The overall overspend of £220k for HB Admin 

due to general staffing costs, however the projected cost is very sensitive to the 

number of new claimants and HB review caseloads. Managers are recruiting more 

benefit assessment officer trainees and also implementing an action plan to improve 

HB admin services. The combination of these actions should reduce the current 

projected overspend. 

32. Payments: The latest projected overspend has reduced from £688k to £341k 

between period 8 and 9, this is mainly due to a small reduction in payment levels and 

corrections to budget allocation. Latest projected payments spend variance of £341k 

to year-end is based on actual payments to week 36. The current weighted average 

subsidy of 92.3% is one of the highest in London and the net expenditure on 

Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit is very sensitive to the subsidy percentage, 

0.01% change is about £50k impact on the budget. Managers are working on 

proposals to reduce the level of subsidy losses and we will be using some of the 

underspend in Homelessness budget to support this overspend. 

33. Overpayments: No significant change between period 8 and period 9. The total 

additional income of £250k from overpayment recoveries is mostly the direct result of 

increased overpaid HB payments. Overpayment recovery performance is on a 

monthly review. 

Homelessness: - (£859k) underspend 

34. No significant changes between period 8 and period 9. The overall projected net 

underspend of £859k is mainly due to the use of new Private Sector Leasing 

accommodation. The gross budget for Homelessness is over £13m and the 

projected variance is about 6%. There are issues on how to sustain the current 

homelessness spend levels in future, there are a number of government proposals to 

review Homelessness services funding and subsidies. The cost of this service is very 

sensitive to HB subsidies payments and direct grants from government to support 

new homelessness prevention schemes. There is a monthly review between all 

service providers to ensure service plans and savings are delivered. Underspend is 

being used to support overspend elsewhere within the Housing General Fund. 

Caravan Sites: - (£8k) underspend 

35. There are no significant changes between period 8 and 9. The total projected 

£8k net underspend is mainly due to reduced costs on salaries and utilities (new 

electricity and water contracts at lower prices, and improved meter securities to 

control theft of electricity and water supplies). Underspend is being used to support 

overspend elsewhere within the Housing General Fund. 

Housing Advice Centre: - (£52k) underspend 

36. The improvement in projected spend between period 6 and 8 is due to 

correction of support cost recharges from the HRA. The overall projected £52k net 

underspend is mainly due to 1 fte post being funded from Community Safety 



esources and another 1 fte vacancy caused by a recent secondment. Underspend 

is being used to support overspend elsewhere within the Housing General Fund. 

Housing Private Sector: - (£59k) underspend 

37. No significant improvement in projected spend between period 8 and 9. The 

overall projected £59k net underspend is mainly due to reduced projected overtime 

payments on Noise Services and reduction in HRA support services recharges. The 

Noise Service is currently being reviewed. Underspend is being used to support 

overspend elsewhere within the Housing General Fund. 

Housing Development Section: - £34k overspend 

38. The £68k movement from underspend to overspend between period 8 and 

period 9 is due to increased projected salary costs, consultancy costs to review the 

new PSL contracts and homelessness strategy. The total projected £34k net 

overspend is mainly due to projected expenditure on a number of housing 

development and procurement strategies. This overspend will be funded out of the 

homelessness underspend. 

Housing Careline Services: - £24k overspend 

39. No significant change between period 8 and 9. The projected total £24k net 

overspend is due to increased operational costs as a result of health and safety 

issues in the Careline Services’ current location at the Civic. This overspend is being 

funded out of the savings elsewhere in the budget. 

Housing Support Services & Management: - £18k overspend 

40. The increase of £10k in projected overspend is due to a number of cost 

reallocation between the HRA and Housing General Fund. The projected £18k net 

overspend is due to projected variance on a number of small support services 

recharges between HRA and Housing General Fund. This overspend is being 

funded out of the savings elsewhere in the budget. 

Central Services: 

41. This report sets out the financial forecast for Central Services based on the 

Month 9 (December 2003) actual figures. The projected variance will result in a net 

underspend of £1,214k, which is an increase of £19k over the £1,195k underspend 

declared in month 8. This improvement is primarily down to a reduction in the 

projected staffing costs in the Personnel and Best Value Services. A full summary of 

the changes from month 8 is shown in Table 1 – Central Services Financial Forecast 

2003/2004: 



Table 1 – Central Services Financial Forecast 2003/2004 

Service Area 

Forecast 

Month 9 

£’000 

Change from 

Month 8 

£’000 

Local Tax/NNDR (20) 13 

Corporate and Democratic Core (25) 0 

Estates and Property Services (54) 0 

Other Corporate Services (1,620) 0 

Chief Executive’s Office 0 (32) 

Finance Services 299 0 

Facilities Management 106 0 

Constitutional Services (70) 0 

Legal Services 170 0 

Total Forecast for Central Services (1,214) (19) 

Local Tax/NNDR (£20k underspend) 

42. The projected variance is due to the predicted savings on salaries within the 

Recovery Section amounting to £70k, which is offset by £50k due to costs of 

employing agency staff to cover staff vacancies and the additional cost of 

implementing the I-World project within the income collection teams. The £13k 

decrease in the underspend from month 8 is due to the increase in agency staffing 

costs to assist with the implementation of the I-World project. 

Corporate and Democratic Core (£25k underspend) 

43. As last month it is anticipated that the one-off set up costs for the Hillingdon 

Community Trust will be lower than expected by £25k. 

Estates (£60k underspend) and Property Services (£6k overspend), net 

underspend of £54k 

44. As reported last month it is anticipated that the projected variance will be an 

underspend of £54k. This is due to a number of projected savings totalling £84k, a 

£10k saving from rent income received for the Uxbridge Industrial Estate, which has 

been sold, a saving of £49k from the property at 192 High Street, which has been 

sub-let to a private tenant, who will be responsible for the day to day running costs 

and a £25k underspend on external consultants in the Property Disposal budget. 

This is offset by an overspend of £24k due to the fall in the number of units let at the 

Warnford Industrial Estate and a slight overspend of £6k which is projected in 

Estates and Valuation due to increased staffing costs. 

Other Corporate Services (£1,620k underspend) 

45. Most of the Rates bills for the Authority have now been finalised following 

challenges mounted by the authority on the current rating list. Indications are that 

rate refunds flowing from these challenges will generate savings of £1,570k over 



and above the £224k assumed in the base budget. A further £50k saving is due to 

the London Residual Body balances redistributed to the Authority for prior year 

County Hall rate refunds dating back to 1995. 

46. The significant improvement of £720k in the variation is due to the outcomes of 

the challenges to the rateable value on the Civic Centre. The final rebates due to the 

Authority are significantly better than those predicted and relate to rebates dating 

back to the 2000/2001 financial year. 

Chief Executive’s Office (nil variance) 

47. The change in the variation from month 8 by £32k is due to an underspend of 

£10k within the Best Value Team on staff salaries and a reduction in the agency staff 

costs within the Personnel Service of £22k. 

Finance Services (£299k overspend) 

48. As reported last month the projected overspend is made up of a number of items 

across the service. The pressures identified are essential, so as to enable the 

Authority to improve its financial management systems and processes, which would 

lead to service efficiencies. 

49. The Central Services Finance Team is expected to overspend by £50k, due 

mainly to agency staff covering a maternity leave and the role of the Head of Finance 

– Central Services. The position for Head of Finance – Central Services was filled 

with a permanent employee with effect from 1 September 2003. 

50. The Financial Systems Support Team is projected to overspend by £40k, due to 

costs involved in setting up a help desk and recruiting agency staff to manage the 

first year of live implementation of the Oracle Financial Management System, which 

is a recognised priority for this Authority. 

51. Insurance Services is anticipated to overspend by £28k, due to temporarily 

recruiting two additional staff to set up a risk register and to undertake work designed 

to help improve our CPA rating in this area. CPA rating has as a result increased 

from a score of 1 to a score of 3. 

52. Treasury Services is anticipated to overspend by £20k, due to additional Brokers 

Commissions in year incurred as a result of debt restructuring designed to reduce 

interest costs in the current year and next. 

53. The Corporate Accountancy Team is expected to overspend by £194k. This 

comes at a time of the greatest change in Local Government Finance, with 

significant change in the department and greater support being required by the 

Authority. The overspend is due to, in particular, difficulties in recruiting to the Head 

of Financial Planning and the resulting additional recruitment costs and covering 

sickness for the role of the Capital Accountant. The Team is also having to cope with 

an additional workload as a result of providing financial input into the HIP program 

and detailed financial support to 3 HIP projects. The position for the Head of 



Financial Planning was filled with a permanent employee with effect from 

20 October 2003. 

54. The Finance Directorate is anticipated to overspend by £30k due to additional 

costs arising as a consequence of covering for the Borough Treasurer’s post which 

became vacant in November and the recruitment costs of appointing new staff. A 

further overspend of £65k will result from the redundancy payments arising following 

the restructuring of the Payroll Section. These additional costs will, to some part, be 

offset by projected savings arising from the continuing vacancies within the Audit 

Team (£50k) and by an agreed reduction in the Authority audit fees (£78k). 

Facilities Management (£106k overspend) 

55. A number of pressures have been identified within this service. The cost of the 

security contract is £42k above the budget provision, staffing costs within the Office 

Services are projected to be £25k overspent, Civic Centre utility bills are higher than 

expected by £35k and a further net pressure of £4k on other Civic Centre budgets. 

56. Due to the restructuring of the Facilities Management service and the 

refurbishment of the Café, it has been very difficult to predict with any certainty how 

the three Trading Accounts (Catering, Cleaning and Printing) have been performing. 

This work will be carried out and completed in February 2004 and the outcomes 

reported within the next monitoring report. 

57. Although not included in the projected year end figures, the Building Cleaning 

and Catering Services will be affected by the Harmonisation process. A bid has been 

submitted to the Contingency Fund for a gross £42k to cover the additional costs. 

Constitutional Services (£70k underspend) 

58. As reported last month the underspend has arisen due to a slippage in the 

implementation of the Community Safety Initiative resulting in a saving of £20k and 

not being able to fill a number of vacant posts within the service resulting in an 

anticipated saving of £50k. 

Legal Services (£170k overspend) 

59. As reported last month the projected overspend is due to continuing pressure on 

the service especially from Social Services and Environmental Services. Increased 

workloads and the high staff vacancy within the service have resulted in a significant 

cost being paid for agency staff to enable the service to function. A further pressure 

on the service is the appointment of the Data Protection Officer to an unfunded post. 

Corporate Budgets’ Forecasts 

60. Table 2 shows Budget, Forecast and Variance now reported on corporate 

budgets i.e. inflation provision/ Interest Income etc and the total position on 

corporate budgets. 



Table 2 

2003/04 

Original 

Budget 

Budget 

changes 

(para’s 17 

to 19) 

2003/04 Corporate Budgets 

Current 

Budget 

(as at 

Month 9) 

2003/04 

Forecast 

(as at 

Month 9) 

Variances (+=Extra spend or 

Less Income )/() indicate less 

costs or greater income 

Variance 

(As at 

Month 9) 

£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 

Variance Variance 

(As at (As at 

Month 8) Month 6) 

11,238 (11,238) 0 Inflation Provision 0 0 0 0 

2,100 (597) 1,503 Developments Contingency 1,503 0 0 0 

(800) - (800) Interest on Balances (80) +720 +720 0 

(500) - (500) BPR / HIP Savings (500) 0 0 0 

(500) - (500) External Contribution (500) 0 0 0 

(32,632) - (32,632) Asset Mgt A/c (32,512) +120 +120 0 

(21,094) (11,835) (32,929) Corporate Budgets (32,089) +840 +840 0 

Corporate budget Variance: - £840k overspend 

61. This significant pressure has not changed since month 8 and has been 

generated for two main reasons. The government has frozen the payment of Asylum 

seekers Grant in the current year due to unresolved issues in the 2002-3 claim. This 

has therefore resulted in a worsened cash-flow position and a resultant loss of 

potential income to be earned of approximately £500k. There has also been a 

significant increase in the sale of council houses, due the future reduction of 

discounts available to tenants. The result of these increased HRA capital receipts is 

that the HRA is charged with a reduced proportion of the Council’s debt financing 

costs which instead falls on the General Fund. This has resulted in a fall of 

approximately £300k in the amount that the HRA owes the General Fund in debt 

financing costs. The reduction in debt financing costs charged to the HRA is an 

exaggerated reflection of the capital receipts in the year due to the way the 

apportionment statutorily has to be calculated. 

62. Officers have taken action to prevent the position from getting worse by 

undertaking a debt restructure, which has resulted in reduced interest costs in the 

current year. 

63. There has been a transfer of £11.238m of inflation provision to Directorates’ 

budgets to date. The following allocations have utilised the whole balance in the 

inflation provision. The following table shows how the inflation has been allocated; 



£000 

Pay awards 7,688 

Contractual arrangements 1,919 

Levies 1,234 

Other* 397 

Total 11,238 

* Note: major components of this figure include: 

£’000 

Members allowances 30 

Grants 45 

Special Schools 114 

Homelessness 19 

Building maintenance 

Social Services Transport 

IT Contract Costs 

School Quantum 

4 

47 

61 

10 

Other 67 

Total 397 

64. Table 2 assumes that the Development and Risk Contingency will be fully 

utilised in 2003/04. Allocations of £557k have been made from the contingency this 

year - including those reflecting members’ approval in 2002/03 of funding for £144k 

expenditure which did not take place until 2003/04. Bids for harmonisation costs total 

£540k (Social Services £450k, Environmental Services £40k and Central Services 

£50k) and whilst a corporate review of these bids is underway, it is assumed that the 

figure of £540k will be justified. There is £300k earmarked in the Contingency to 

support the revenue budget provision of £300k for self-insured claims. Current 

projections based on settlements up to the end of December suggest that the £300k 

contingency will be required in full. The harmonisation and Insurance commitments 

are incorporated into the table overleaf which also sets out the items provided for 

within the contingency: 



2003/04 Allocated 

Budget or 

committed 

£’000 £’000 

Harmonisation 500 540 

Business Rates – Civic Centre 400 Not needed 

Residential Care Allowances 450 Not needed 

Uninsured Claims 300 300 

Early Years Centres’ budget shortfall 40 0 

HIP / Procurement savings 300 180 

Pensions for Councillors 94 Not needed 

Allocations brought forward from 2002/03: 

Sec 106 temporary staff (ESG) 20 

Planning appeal Ruislip Community School (ESG) 33 

Challenge Consulting (Central) 31 

Cranford Women’s project (Central) 60 

2003/04 allocations: 

Challenge Consulting / other specific HIP 

82 

allocations (Central) 

NOTRAG & Decideum (Central) 10 

Hillingdon Youth Offending Service (SocServices) 62 

Bellfarm Advice Centre (Central) 15 

Campaign against 3 rd Runway (Central) 25 

Festive Decorations (ESG) 24 

Litter Campaign design and publicity 15 

Reduction at Council Budget meeting -484 

Total: 2,100 1,397 

65. Taking allocations and commitments to date into account, the unallocated 

balance on the Contingency currently stands at £703k. Further issues to be 

considered in this perspective are: 

• HIP/Procurement savings: £300k – provision made to cover start-up costs and 

recognising an ambitious income target. £180k has already been allocated from 

Contingency so far this year. Shortfall currently identified at £300k but some of 

these costs may be chargeable to the HRA. It is therefore possible that the full 

£300k will not be required. 

• Pensions for Councillors: £94k – this will not be required in the current financial 

year. 

66. Taking these issues into account the uncommitted balance of the Contingency 

would reduce to £583k. 



OVERALL FINANCIAL POSITION 

67. Table 3 indicates the overall impact of the expenditure forecasts now reported 

on the approved budget and the resulting balances position. 

Table 3 

2003/04 

Original 

Budget 

2003/04 

(As at Month 9) 

Current 

Budget 

Forecast 

(as at Month 

9) 

Variances (+=Extra spend or Less 

Income )/() indicate less costs or 

greater income 

Variance (As 

at Month 9) 

Variance 

(As at 

Month 8) 

Variance 

(As at 

Month6) 

£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 

Directorates’ 

289,886 Expenditure 301,721 300,052 (1,669) (1,568) (72) 

(21,094) Corporate Budgets (32,929) (32,089) +840 +840 0 

268,792 Total Net Expenditure 268,792 267,963 (829) (728) (72) 

(269,792) Budget Requirement (269,792) (269,792) 0 0 0 

(1,000) (Surplus)/Deficit (1,000) (1,829) (829) (728) (72) 

(2,800) Balances b/f 1/4/03 (3,376) (3,376) 0 0 0 

(3,800) Balances c/f 31/3/04 (4,376) (5,205) (829) (728) (72) 


a B c = b-a 

68. This is a report of the Director of Finance and the financial implications are 

included throughout. 


69. There are no specific legal implications arising from this report. 


Monitoring reports 



OPENING OF THE PRIVATE EQUITY TENDER OFF 

SITE 

ITEM 12 

Contact Officer: Louise Branford-White 

Telephone: 01895 250818 

SUMMARY 

The response to the Private Equity open OJEC tender will be opened off site in the 

presence of an officer from Democratic or Legal Services. Opening the tender off 

site is because a large number of proposals and quantity of supporting documents 

are expected. This report is required under standing orders to note to Cabinet the 

unopened tenders not being sent to the civic centre and not being accompanied off 

site by 2 officers, following this approval being authorised by an appropriate officer. 


The report be noted 

INFORMATION 

1. The pension fund is undertaking an open OJEC tender for Private Equity. The 

amount to be invested would be in the region of £18 million, approximately 5% of the 

total value of the pension fund. 

2. Due to the specialist nature of Private Equity, BFINANCE have been appointed to 

analyse and review the information returned from the tender process. It is expected 

that a large quantity of responses will be received and that the volume of information 

supplied will be great. 

3. It would therefore be sensible to have the completed tender documents sent 

straight to BFINANCE offices. The tender documents will then be opened in the 

presence of an officer from Democratic or Legal Services. 


4. Section 16 (a) of Procurement and Contract Standing Order number requires 

tenders to be returned to the Civic Centre. Section 3 of the same standing order 

provides that the Standing Order must be complied with at all times but there are 

some exceptions. 

5. Section 3 (b) states an exception can be “by direction of the Appropriate 

Delegated Officer where such direction is justified by special exceptional 

circumstances and will be subject to a report to the cabinet”. 


6. The proposal is the most practical in the circumstances. 



Conclusion 

7. The response to the Private Equity tender will be opened off site in the presence 

of an officer from Democratic or Legal Services due to the expectation that a large 

number of tenders will be received and the documentation will be great. The 

appropriate Delegated Officer who has authorised this is the Director of Finance. 


Procurement and Contract Standing Orders

Report - London Borough of Hillingdon

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?