The Transport, Environment, Communities and Climate Change Select Committee met on Tuesday 8 September 2026 to discuss anti-social behaviour, the proposed expansion of Heathrow Airport, and the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. Key discussions included strategies for tackling anti-social behaviour through multi-agency collaboration and the potential impacts of Heathrow expansion on Buckinghamshire. The committee also reviewed progress on the Local Nature Recovery Strategy and its integration with local planning.

Anti-Social Behaviour and Crime

The committee received an overview of anti-social behaviour (ASB) and crime in Buckinghamshire, presented by Councillor Steve Bowles, Cabinet Member for Communities, along with Sara Turnbull, Service Director for Strategy, Improvements and Community Safety, Abdul Rahim, Community Safety Manager, and representatives from Thames Valley Police, Chief Inspector Alexander Ash and Inspector Harry Gehnich.

The report detailed the legal definitions of ASB under the Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, distinguishing between conduct in public settings (causing harassment, alarm, or distress) and housing settings (causing nuisance or annoyance). It was highlighted that ASB is victim-centred, relying on the reported experience of those affected. Police recording categories for ASB include personal, nuisance, and environmental. Baroness Newlove, the Victims Commissioner, was quoted as referring to ASB as low-level crime that can escalate to more serious offending due to its profound impact on victims.

The presentation outlined the statutory duty placed on various agencies, including the police, local authorities, fire and rescue, health authorities, and probation services, under Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 to reduce crime and disorder. This is overseen in Buckinghamshire by the Safer Buckinghamshire Board. A wide range of internal council teams and external partner organisations, including housing providers, are involved in responding to ASB.

In the 2025-2026 period, Community Safety received 812 reports of ASB, with 242 cases requiring a coordinated multi-agency response, 81% of which were successfully resolved. The process for responding to ASB involves joint countywide protocols and monthly meetings of the Antisocial Behaviour Action Group (ASBAG) in North, South Bucks, and High Wycombe to discuss complex cases. Tools and powers available range from informal measures like warning letters and mediation to formal powers such as Community Protection Notices, Criminal Behaviour Orders, and Public Space Protection Orders.

A case study was presented on resolving a complex, long-standing unlawful encampment near the A41 in Aylesbury, which involved a multi-agency response including Thames Valley Police, Legal Services, and various support services. This intervention, balancing enforcement with support, resulted in the individual engaging with services and not returning to the site.

Thames Valley Police presented their ASB Action Plan, focusing on better understanding ASB, engaging with communities, using data more effectively, prevention and problem-solving, improving victim support, and clear communication. In 2025-2026, 2,910 ASB incidents were recorded across Buckinghamshire. The Safer Streets operations, a partnership initiative in town centres, involved increased police presence, outreach, and enforcement, leading to reductions in public order offences, theft from vehicles, theft from person, robbery, and sexual offences in Aylesbury. Retail crime outcomes also saw significant increases in positive outcomes.

During the discussion, concerns were raised about ASB in rural areas, the effectiveness of soft options versus criminal justice system interventions, the need for data on protected characteristics, and the impact of reduced youth services. The committee also discussed the role of parish councils, the challenges of reporting ASB in rural areas, and the importance of visible policing. The issue of speeding was also raised, with emphasis on community reporting and the use of speedwatch schemes. The correlation between ASB and young people not in employment, education, or training (NEETs) was acknowledged, as was the importance of youth services and diversionary activities. The fear of crime, particularly among women, and the role of community leaders in myth-busting were also discussed. The committee was reassured that neighbourhood teams are being resourced to cover rural areas and that efforts are being made to improve data collection on protected characteristics.

Heathrow Expansion Programme

The committee reviewed a report on the planned expansion of Heathrow Airport and considered the impact of a third runway on Buckinghamshire and its residents. Contributors included Councillor Thomas Broom, Cabinet Member for Transport, Steve Bambrick, Corporate Director for Planning Growth & Sustainability, Hannah Austin, Service Director - Infrastructure and Major Projects, Daniel Gigg, Infrastructure Delivery Manager, Hannah Thomas-Davies, Principal Planning Officer, and representatives from Heathrow West Limited: Surinder Arora (Founder and Chairman), Carlton Brown (CEO), Ries-William Lamont (Director of Stakeholder Engagement), and Sarah Price (Planning Director). Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) was unable to attend.

The report outlined that the Government has renewed its support for a third runway at Heathrow, with a revised Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS), the Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement (HENPS), published for consultation. Buckinghamshire Council is a consultee in this national process, with the final decision resting with the Secretary of State for Transport. Two promoters, Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) and Heathrow West Limited (HWL), are advancing alternative proposals.

HAL's proposal includes a 3,500-metre runway and significant alterations to the M25 motorway, potentially impacting South Buckinghamshire for environmental mitigation. HWL's alternative is a shorter, 2,400-metre runway, avoiding major M25 realignment. Both promoters are in the pre-application stage of the Development Consent Order (DCO) process, aiming for consent by Summer 2029.

The Council's position is to reassess potential impacts, having previously raised concerns about environmental impacts (noise, air quality, landscape, flooding, ecology) and airport-related traffic, alongside acknowledging potential benefits like employment opportunities and the removal of aircraft holding over the county.

During the discussion, HWL presented their shorter runway proposal, arguing it would be more cost-effective and deliver benefits sooner than HAL's longer runway scheme. They highlighted that their proposal avoids moving the M25 and other significant infrastructure, thus reducing the spread of impacts. Questions were raised about what was being sacrificed for a shorter runway, with HWL explaining that while some aircraft might not be able to use the shorter runway, the airport's overall capacity could be maintained by utilising the two existing full-length runways.

Concerns were raised about the environmental impact, particularly regarding carbon emissions and the potential for a zero-carbon build and operation. HWL stated they would do their best within market conditions and affordability, but could not make firm promises.

Councillor Wendy Matthews, as the ward member for an area most affected by Heathrow expansion, raised several questions regarding consultation with Buckinghamshire residents, the management of cargo freight on local roads, mitigation for noise and air quality, and land take requirements. HWL confirmed that engagement with Buckinghamshire residents is planned for later this year and early next year, with formal consultation in Spring 2027. They are working on detailed assessments for land take, noise modelling, and cargo management, proposing a new railhead to reduce road usage for construction.

Further questions from the committee focused on the impact on local infrastructure, including housing demolition and the lack of linkage to HS2 and wider road/rail networks. HWL acknowledged that some homes would need to be demolished but are exploring options for replacing displaced assets. They are also investigating various surface access solutions, including rail links and discouraging car use through charges. The committee was informed that linking to HS2 is not within the promoter's control.

The impact of work on M25 junctions 14 and 14A was discussed, with HWL stating their proposal involves less significant changes than HAL's. The committee also sought clarification on flight paths, air quality, noise pollution, and the transport impact of both construction and ongoing operations, particularly regarding freight. The potential for a contraction in the speed of determination for the DCO was also raised, with HWL noting that government timelines are uncertain. The committee expressed interest in future discussions on jobs and skills, and the possibility of bringing technical experts to future meetings.

Local Nature Recovery Strategy

The committee reviewed the progress of the Local Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS), adopted in October 2025 and launched in December 2025. Contributors included Councillor Ade Osibogun, Cabinet Member for Environment, Climate Change and Waste, Claire Bayley, Chief Planning Officer, and Nicola Thomas, Natural Environment Partnerships Manager.

The LNRS aims to achieve a thriving plant and wildlife population, improve environmental quality, mitigate climate change, and enhance biosecurity, beauty, heritage, and engagement with the natural environment. It is a spatial strategy, locally led by Buckinghamshire Council as the Responsible Authority, covering Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes. The strategy identifies priorities and measures for nature's recovery and maps opportunities, which can attract external funding.

The LNRS consists of nine themes, 21 priorities, and 123 measures. An interactive mapping tool is available online, showing areas important for nature now and areas that could become important in the future. The government expects local authorities to lead and convene delivery partnerships, embed the LNRS into local decision-making, identify strategic projects, and monitor and report on progress.

The Natural Environment Partnership (NEP) is leading the delivery of the LNRS, supported by Defra funding. The council has an MOU with the NEP, which has established communities of practice and is developing workstreams for project development, monitoring, and community engagement. The council has a legal requirement to prepare and update the LNRS every 3-10 years. The LNRS is intended to inform the local planning process and identify areas of high strategic significance for Biodiversity Net Gain.

During the discussion, a public question was raised about engaging local environmental groups and town and parish councils in shaping and delivering the strategy. Councillor Osibogun confirmed that engagement is ongoing and will continue through workshops and a user guide.

Concerns were raised about the measurability of the LNRS measures, the lack of baseline data for nature recovery, and the impact of recent droughts on biodiversity. Nicola Thomas explained that the measures conform to DEFRA requirements and that a baseline map is included in the LNRS. DEFRA's reporting requirement is currently activity-based, but they are exploring impact reporting. The NEP is also supporting a citizen-science led impact monitoring programme.

Questions were also raised about the alignment between the LNRS and the local plan, the capacity of council teams to enforce Biodiversity Net Gain requirements, and the reduction in council funding to the Chiltern National Landscapes, a key delivery partner. Councillors reassured the committee that there is alignment between the LNRS and the local plan, and that the council has ecologists to enforce BNG. The reduction in funding to the Chiltern National Landscapes was attributed to financial constraints, with a commitment to increase funding if central government support becomes available.

The committee also discussed the upcoming formal launch of the Nature Projects online brochure and the plans for engaging local communities. The importance of water management, resilience, and the progress of various council motions, including those on tree retention, chalk streams, and idling, were also highlighted for future discussion.

Work Programme

The committee noted the Work Programme, with three subjects already scheduled for the next meeting on 4 November 2026. Members requested further discussion on water management, resilience, and updates on previously passed council motions. The possibility of inviting water companies and the Environment Agency to discuss water resources and flooding was proposed. A session on community and nature resilience was also suggested. The committee also requested written updates on the progress of various council motions.