Hillingdon Cabinet approves fortnightly garden waste and £69 wheelie bins to replace sacks, without asking residents. Email councillors before Friday’s deadline

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that there was no public consultation on moving garden waste from sacks to wheelie bins with fortnightly collections all year round. About 23,000 households subscribe, and the Cabinet report simply says it does not propose to consult. At the same meeting, Cabinet agreed to consult for six weeks on changes to the family hub service, so consultation was possible. The Constitution says decisions should follow due consultation, and I would like the committee to ask Cabinet to consult subscribers before the change goes ahead.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that the rules deciding which homes can have a garden waste bin were left to officers to write after the decision. Cabinet delegated ‘property suitability’, charges for replacement bins and where bins are placed for collection to a Corporate Director. The Leader told the meeting there would be alternatives where properties cannot accommodate bins, and assisted collections for eligible residents, so who qualifies matters a great deal. Many homes locally have short drives, small front gardens or no side access, and I think those rules should be published and shown to the committee before they are finalised.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I would like the committee to ask how garden waste bins will actually reach about 23,000 homes by April 2027, and what will happen to households that cannot take one. The Cabinet report calls the timetable ‘challenging but achievable’, the new bin-lifting vehicles are not expected for 18 to 24 months so hired vehicles will be needed first, and households may be asked to keep using sacks if bins are delayed. Residents need to know the timetable, how they will be told, and what happens if a bin does not arrive.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned about how reliable the current garden waste service is. Some subscribers have reported waiting months for sacks or tags after signing up, sacks blowing away, and crews not collecting. I would like the committee to ask for complaints and missed-collection figures for the current service, and for evidence that bins will fix these problems rather than create new ones, before a larger change is made.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I would like the committee to ask Cabinet to show its working on the alternatives to the garden waste changes. The report considered keeping weekly collections from bins for nine months of the year, but did not recommend it, and I cannot find a costing for that option. The minutes record only that alternatives were “considered but discounted”, while the Constitution says decisions must make clear what options were rejected and why.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

Many residents fear that fortnightly garden waste is a first step towards fortnightly general waste collections. The Leader told Cabinet that general waste, food waste and recycling collections will remain weekly, but that is not in the recommendations. I would like the committee to ask Cabinet to confirm that commitment in writing.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am worried about where 240-litre garden waste bins will go at homes like mine. Many properties locally are terraced or have small front gardens, and bins cannot be folded away like sacks. I would like the committee to ask how many households the Council expects to be unsuitable for a bin, and what they will be offered instead.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that the Cabinet report does not mention flats, shared gardens or houses in multiple occupation at all. I would like the committee to ask who is entitled to a bin where several households share a garden or a space for bins, who pays, and where it is kept.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that many homes locally have no drive or side access, so garden waste bins will end up on the pavement. Wheelchair users, people with buggies or mobility aids, and people with sight loss would have to go round them into the road. The Cabinet report says sacks already block pavements in some places, but it does not say how bins left out will be managed. I would like the committee to ask how obstruction will be prevented and whether the equality effects were assessed.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned about the effect of garden waste bins on streets of terraced houses with small front gardens. The Cabinet report says only that some residents will never appreciate the aesthetic impact bins may bring to some locations. I would like the committee to ask whether the effect on the street scene was assessed and what will be done to reduce it.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that sacks will stay available only for unsuitable properties, so the test is the property and not the person. Some residents, especially older people and people with a health condition or disability, can lift a sack but cannot fill, steer or tip a full 240-litre bin. The assisted collection service described in the report covers presenting a container, not filling it. I would like the committee to ask Cabinet to let these residents keep using sacks and to publish how they apply.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that the report says sacks will continue only where a property is ‘unsuitable’ for a wheeled bin, but does not say who decides, on what test, or whether a householder can challenge the decision. I would like the committee to ask Cabinet to give a right of appeal to any household that is judged suitable for a bin but cannot make one work, and to let those households, and others who would rather keep sacks, pay a higher price to do so. The report says about 7,000 subscribers use six sacks, and says customers can be asked to keep using sacks if bin deliveries are delayed, so sacks can plainly still be collected. A higher price for sacks would cover the extra cost to the Council, and would be better than forcing a bin on a home where it does not fit.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that only an equalities screening was carried out on the garden waste changes, and that the Council concluded a full equality impact assessment was not needed. Moving a full 240-litre bin to the kerb can be hard for older and disabled residents. Assisted collections exist, but I think the effect on these residents should be properly assessed. At the same meeting, Cabinet was told that a draft equality impact assessment will be published alongside the family hub consultation, so I would expect one here too.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that the garden waste changes will give me much less capacity. The Cabinet report describes one 240-litre bin as similar to three sacks, but sacks are collected weekly for most of the year. Three 90-litre sacks collected weekly hold about 540 litres over a fortnight, while one bin collected fortnightly holds 240 litres, which is less than half. Over a year, the current service means roughly 40 or more collections of up to 270 litres, against 25 collections of up to 240 litres, a little over half the capacity for a price only £8 lower.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned about the cost of the new garden waste charges for households that use more than three sacks. Today £77 covers either three or six sacks. A household that needs two bins would pay £138 a year, about 79% more, for less than half the capacity (in the main season, 480 litres a fortnight against 1,080 litres from six sacks collected weekly). The Cabinet report says around 7,000 current subscribers have six sacks.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that the new garden waste charges include no concessions. The Council’s own comparison table shows four of the five other councils it looked at (St Albans, Hounslow, Ealing and Three Rivers) offer reduced prices to residents on council tax support or certain benefits, but Hillingdon proposes none. For pensioners and people on low incomes, £69 or £138 a year for an optional service is a lot, and I would like the committee to ask why none is proposed.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I would like the Council to confirm in writing what happens to my garden waste bin if I cancel my subscription or decide not to renew. The Cabinet report does not say whether the Council will collect the bin, how soon, whether it will charge me for that, or whether I have to keep it in my garden in the meantime. I would also like to know what the first bin, any replacement and any extra bin will cost me. Cabinet left the charges for replacements to be decided later by an officer, and residents should know all of this before they are asked to renew.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I would like the committee to ask how the figure of about 40,000 garden waste bins was reached, when around 23,000 households subscribe. The report says the order will cover existing subscribers, some growth and a stock of spares, but it gives no numbers. The bins are to be bought through a national purchasing framework, so other councils must already use the same ones. I would like to know which councils those are and how often they have to replace them. I would also like to know whether I would be liable if my bin is cracked, damaged by the collection crews, or stolen, and what it will cost the Council to store the spare bins, which the report does not mention.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I would like the committee to ask for the working behind the £0.8 million a year saving. The consultants’ review the Council commissioned estimated that going fortnightly would cut about 25% of the service’s cost, worth about £0.32 million a year, and said a detailed service review was needed to establish the real figure. The Cabinet’s figure also includes bins and other changes, but it is more than double the consultants’ estimate and residents have not seen how it was reached. Cabinet was told the savings ‘depend on both the move to wheeled bins and the move to fortnightly collections’, so I would like to see how much comes from each. That split depends on how many households are judged unsuitable for a bin and keep using sacks, and I cannot find any estimate of that number in the report.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that so many changes to garden waste are being made at once. The consultants’ review suggested a £10 fee rise first and a move to fortnightly collections later, in 2028/29, “to stagger the change to residents”. Cabinet has instead changed the container, the frequency and the price together from April 2027, and I would like the committee to ask why.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that the £0.8 million a year saving from the garden waste changes rests on subscriber numbers staying where they are. The Cabinet report says its figures are “based on current subscription levels” and accepts there is a risk to income if subscriptions fall. Many residents are saying publicly that they will not renew, and I would like the committee to ask what happens to the savings if they do not.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that the full cost of the garden waste changes is not before the public or the committee. Cabinet has agreed to buy 40,000 bins for around £1.2 million and to hire six vehicles in the meantime, but the new bin-lifting lorries need a separate approval later, with costs due in the medium-term financial strategy in February 2027, so the £0.8 million saving is quoted before the cost of the lorries is known. The report does not say how the £1.2 million taken from the capital contingency is financed or what it will cost in interest. I would like the committee to ask for the whole-project cost before the commitment goes any further.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The garden waste charge began in July 2025, and the Cabinet report says sack tags alone cost about £100,000 a year. I would like the committee to ask how much has been spent on sacks, tags and administration since then, what will happen to stock that is no longer needed, and why bins were not considered when the charge was introduced.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I am concerned that fewer collections and less capacity will push more garden waste into general waste bins, onto bonfires, into fly-tipping or to the Household Waste Recycling Centre. The Cabinet report itself says it wants a strong subscriber base to balance demand and traffic at centres such as New Year Green Lane in Harefield, and many residents are saying publicly that they will not renew. I would like the committee to ask what the Council expects to happen to subscribers, general waste, tip visits and traffic, and for the figures on how general waste changed after the charge was introduced. The Cabinet member pointed to a trial of garden waste disposal at ‘Waste Weekends’, which the report does not mention, and I would like to know how that would cope if subscribers leave.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I would like the committee to ask for the evidence behind the claim that fortnightly bin collections need about a third fewer trucks and crews. Bins are emptied one or two at a time, and residents worry about slower rounds, queues behind lorries and idling engines. The report also claims fewer vehicle journeys and lower emissions, but I cannot see the figures.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I would like the committee to ask for the evidence for the environmental benefits claimed for the garden waste changes. The report says there are “examples” where moving from sacks to bins increased participation and green waste capture, but it names none.