In July 2025, Hillingdon Council’s then-Cabinet Member for Community & Environment, Cllr. Eddie Lavery, cited “survey data” as a key reason for not implementing an entrance fee at Ruislip Lido. However, a subsequent Freedom of Information (FOI) response, email correspondence and a rejected follow-up question have cast significant doubt on the existence – and the accuracy – of that data.
The Contradiction: After a Six-Week Wait
The issue began at the 10 July Full Council meeting, when one resident asked the council to consider charging an entrance fee for out-of-borough visitors. Cllr. Lavery didn’t respond in the meeting, using his right to submit only a written answer weeks later, in which he claimed that “survey data” justified keeping the Lido free.
Show the question, as read out by the Mayor
On 16 September, the local campaigner submitted a formal FOI request asking for copies of this data. It wasn’t until 5 November – nearly two months later – that the FOI team provided a startling admission:
“No formal specific and targeted survey was carried out in relation to the Lido.”
This admission directly contradicts the evidence provided to the Full Council. It suggests that while the Cabinet Member was citing “survey data” to justify policy, the Council’s own professional staff could find no record of such a survey ever taking place.
The Follow-Up Question the Council Blocked
The Follow-Up Question the Council Blocked
Following a summer of contradictory information, a local campaigner for Lido residents attempted to gain clarity at the Full Council in November. They submitted the following question to the Cabinet Member:
“In the minutes of the July 10th Full Council meeting, the Cabinet Member… stated: ‘Survey data has shown that the majority of visitors are Hillingdon Residents.’
In response to FOI request 03740, the council has since stated: ‘No formal specific and targeted survey was carried out…’
Can the Cabinet Member please explain this direct contradiction?”
However, residents didn’t get their answer because the question was blocked from the agenda. Under the Council’s constitution, the “six-month rule” prevents any public question from being asked if it is deemed “the same or similar” to one asked in the previous six months.
This rule is unfortunate because public questions are only allowed at July, September, November and January meetings – the other full Council meetings in February and May do not allow them – closing one of the democratic routes for residents to challenge the Cabinet Member on his previous statements.
“Informal” Work and Unreliable Data
When challenged via email on 12 November, Cllr. Lavery clarified that the council had only conducted “informal survey work.” He revealed that the Council’s primary evidence is actually car park transactions, claiming that 81% of tickets were purchased with a HillingdonFirst Card.
However, relying on HillingdonFirst data as a proxy for current residency and carpark use is fundamentally flawed:
- A 17 year old database: The card was launched in June 2009. The self-proclaimed “driving force” behind the project was Cllr Douglas Mills, who remains a local councillor in Ruislip Manor today.
- The residency gap: Because these cards have no expiry date, the database has been accumulating users for nearly 17 years. There is no mechanism to account for the thousands of people who have moved to neighboring boroughs but kept their cards to maintain free parking across the borough including at the Lido.
- Displacement: Non-residents are the most likely to avoid official car parks (where charges can reach £18.60) to park in residential side streets. They are completely invisible to the 81% statistic.
- Public transport users: So many other people visiting the Lido take the H13 bus service that residents living along the H13 route from the Lido to Ruislip station often can’t get on the crowded buses: these visitor numbers are also excluded from the statistics. Social media, online magazines and London tourist guides often feature “London’s secret beach” and it is clear from YouTubers and videos on TikTok that there are visitors from outside of the borough.
New job, but the Lido follows Cllr Lavery into his £150m bailout
The Lido debate has followed Cllr. Lavery into his new role as Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation. He is now tasked with steering Hillingdon – a council with a £1 billion turnover – through the massive financial crisis that has seen it apply for a bailout – £150 million in Exceptional Financial Support (EFS) – from the government to avoid bankruptcy.
One of the ways it hopes to bridge the gap means that the Council’s draft budget seeks to raise £1.2 million in additional parking charges across the borough in the next year. Yet, the Council continues to refuse to charge entry to the Lido for any visitors, residents or not, apparently based on the incomplete and unreliable data of the informal survey. It remains unclear why the Council continues to give free parking for all leisure visitors (residents and non-residents alike) at Ruislip Woods and Ruislip’s Winston Churchill Hall, only for non-residents at the Lido, while charging everyone at locations like The Beck Theatre in Hayes – during such a crisis and amidst such critical need to raise revenue.
Seeking Clarity
It appears the Council is using narrow, outdated data to justify a broad policy that costs the taxpayer significant potential revenue. This discrepancy echoes the ongoing delays regarding the Lido Public Safety Review, where promises made by leadership seemed to never reach the officers on the ground.
We hope that the new Cabinet Member for Community & Environment, Cllr. Wayne Bridges, can bring transparency to the Lido’s management. Until a formal, verified visitor survey is conducted, residents will continue to feel they are footing the bill for a system that is years past its use-by date.
The 2026 draft budget sees some revisions to the HillingdonFirst free parking scheme – reducing the repeat free 30-minute-free parking in some locations, so we live in hope of a reconsideration at the Lido too. Will it come too late for residents at the Lido for the Summer 2026 season?
Comments are closed.