Agenda and minutes

The Mayor welcomed everyone to the meeting and made brief statement about the filming of proceedings and generally within the Town Hall, followed by a fire safety announcement.

He also sought the consent of the meeting to take the Corporate Strategy report (Item 11 on the Supplemental Agenda) earlier in the meeting.  The Council agreed to this item being considered immediately following Item 6 (Review of Allocation of Seats).

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Mike Booth, Kath Pratt, Tina Walker, Kimberley Whitehead and Mohammed Younis.

In connection with Agenda Item 10 (Motion 2) – Reforming UK Maternity Services, Councillor Clare Yates made the meeting aware that she was a serving NHS senior midwife.

There were no formal declarations of interest or declarations of dispensations submitted.

a)    Mayor

b)    Leader of the Council

c)    Chief Executive

There were no announcements from the Mayor on this occasion.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, made the following announcements:

1)         Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation

Local Government Reorganisation was moving forward at a pace.  Consultants had been engaged to lead the process in Lancashire.  Phase 1 would involve data analysis in close collaboration with all local councils.  Phase 2 would see the development of clear proposals and specific options for either three (Hyndburn’s preferred option) or four unitary authorities.  The structures should be effective, have a strong identity, provide community impact and sustainability.  The submission to Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) was due to be made on 28^th November 2025.

Overall, the changes were designed to better meet the needs of the population.  Local council leaders were continuing to collaborate and everyone would have a voice.  The Leader undertook to keep members informed as to progress.

2)         Oswaldtwistle Civic Theatre

The Leader reported that the Council had recently allocated £517k for roofing works at the Civic Theatre.  £10k had also been received from Theatres in Trust to pay for a survey of the roof, advice and works.  The building was a complex structure and would need scaffolding to enable roof works to be undertaken.  The slates would need to be stripped off and batons removed.  These would be reused, if possible.  Work would be required to roof lights, insulation, guttering, drain pipes and for timber treatment.  The aim was to make the structure waterproof.  The tender would be let next week with work due to commence in Autumn for completion in December 2025, subject to the survey not uncovering any hidden problems.

Some treatment for dry rot in the building had already been carried out, but no other works were planned yet beyond what was described above.  A detailed project plan would be required, funding identified and a strategy developed for the Civic Theatre’s future use.

With the permission of the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Noordad Aziz, made the following announcement:

3)         Srebreneca Commemoration

The Deputy Mayor reminded members that the Council had previously passed a motion against islamophobia and that 11^th July 2025 marked the 30^th anniversary of the genocide around the town Srebreneca, during which over 8000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys were systematically murdered.  The Deputy Mayor had visited that area three times over the years.  Councillors were invited to highlight injustice and atrocities wherever they occurred.

As part of the above commemoration, Councillor Aziz had attended an event held at St Paul’s Cathedral London on 16^th July 2025, during which survivors, political leaders, religious dignitaries and community representatives had gathered to pay their respects.

With the permission of the Mayor, the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Zak Khan, made the following announcement

4)         Air and Army Cadets Headquarters

Councillor Khan reported that, along with the Mayor, he had recently attended the official opening of the new headquarters of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

To confirm as correct, the minutes of the Annual Council and Special Council meetings both held on 15^th May 2025 and the Mayor Making Council meeting held on 31^st May 2025.

The Minutes of the Annual Council and Special Council meetings both held on 15^th May 2025 and the Mayor Making Meeting held on 31^st May 2025 were provided.

In respect of Minute 6 – Confirmation of Minutes (Minute 417), Councillor Steven Smithson noted that progress had been made in relation to continuing the skip days and he thanked Councillor Stewart Eaves, Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services, and officers.  He also asked if the community beat sweeps would be reintroduced.  In response, Councillor Eaves considered that it might be possible to carry out community beat sweeps too.

In connection with Minute 6 – Confirmation of Minutes (Minute 416), Councillor Smithson enquired if the Council intended to cancel the 2026 local elections.  Councillor Munsif Dad indicated that it was a matter for the Government to determine whether those elections would be held.  He stated that he was not aware of any proposals to cancel the elections.

Regarding Minutes 17 and 25 – Appointment of and Conferment of the Titles of Honorary Aldermen and Freemen, the Leader of the Council remarked that all recipients had attended the Mayor Making meeting and luncheon event, which had been an excellent day.  The individuals appointed were the right choice for the honours and the Council would continue to consider other community champions for these awards next year.

In respect of Minute 6 – Confirmation of Minutes (Minute 427(3)), Councillor Paul Cox asked if there was any further information about Accrington Stanley FC, as residents continued to make enquiries about the club’s situation.  He had previously received a verbal update, but was aware that there might be some more recent developments.  Residents had also asked about any plans for the Livingstone Road site.  He requested that ward councillors be kept informed.  Councillor Dad confirmed that he had spoken to both Milnshaw ward councillors on these matters previously and that there were likely to be further developments in the future.  He undertook to keep them both updated going forward.

Resolved                                    -    That the Minutes of the Annual Council and Special Council meetings both held on 15^th May 2025 and the Mayor Making Meeting held on 31^st May 2025 be approved as a correct record.

To deal with any questions submitted under Council Procedure Rule A2.2(vi).

Details of any eligible questions received will be circulated following the expiration of the deadline for the receipt of questions.  Questions must be submitted by no later than 12 noon on Monday 7^th July 2025.

Report attached.

Twelve eligible questions had been received, which were set out in the report.

1)         Determination of Planning Applications

To the Leader of the Council (Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP) or relevant Portfolio Holder

Submitted by Councillor Zak Khan, on behalf of a resident, Vinette Davitt

“I would like to raise the following question at the next full Council meeting please.

The National Planning Portal says that the standard time for a decision is 8 weeks, but that this can be extended to 13 weeks if an Application is unusually large or complex.

The Government website says no more than 26 weeks for Major Applications.

11/24/0417 was registered with HBC Planning Dept on 5^th November 2024, which I roughly calculate to be 31 weeks.

What is the reason for the delay, bearing in mind that HBC Planning Department could be penalised for allowing it to go over the Government's timescale for a complex Application?”

Response:

The Leader of the Council thanked the resident and Councillor Khan for the question.  The standard target to determine a non-major planning application was 8 weeks and 13 weeks for a major application.  26 weeks was the maximum for a major application, unless a longer period had been agreed in writing.  Normally, applications were decided within a shorter period.  If the matter was complex it was proper to extend the time period.

The application identified by the questioner (a proposed burial ground to the south of Blackburn Road, Oswaldtwistle) was significant, complex and technical in nature, so both parties had agreed to an extension.  Accordingly, the Council would not be penalised for the extended timeframe.  This would allow the officer team time to consider all of the information available and to assess the application thoroughly, along with any objections, based on the local development plan and other relevant guidance.

Currently, the Planning Department was aiming to submit this application to the Planning Committee on 20 August 2025.  However, officers were required to take all of the relevant issues into account, so it might be necessary to agree a longer timescale.

A supplementary question was asked by Councillor Khan on the following:

Councillor Khan acknowledged that the matter was both contentious and complex and had been over four years in the making.  He noted that residents were concerned about the application and expressed the view that providing more time for consideration might give the applicant an advantage.  He asked what specifically were the reasons for granting the extension and if he could have a copy of those details.

The Mayor commented that the total time allowed for all questions was 30 minutes and that a lengthy interaction on single question could adversely affect the time available to hear other questions and answers.  In the light of this, Councillors Dad and Khan agreed to a written response being provided after the meeting.

2)         Land on Albert Street in Oswaldtwistle

To the Leader of the Council (Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP) or relevant Portfolio Holder

Submitted by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

Report and addendum attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, together with an addendum circulated at the meeting, which set out the outcome of a review of the allocation of seats to political groups and which sought to approve to a number of amendments to committee sizes and consequential and other proposed changes to the appointment of individual councillors to serve on those committees and their designated chairs or vice-chairs

Review of Allocation of Seats

In accordance with The Local Government (Committees and Political Groups) Regulations 1990, the Council was required to review the allocation of seats to political groups under s.15 Local Government and Housing Act 1989, in certain prescribed circumstances.  This included following the service of a notice to the proper officer under Regulation 8 by members wishing to form a political group on the Council, provided that at least one month had elapsed since the previous review.  The previous review had been undertaken on 7^th May 2025 ahead of the Annual Council Meeting on 15^th May 2025.

A notice had now been submitted under Regulation 8, which included the addition of Councillor Joyce Plummer to the Conservative Group, which was a change from the information previously notified to the proper officer.   This had automatically triggered a review of the allocation of seats.

The review had resulted in minor adjustments being proposed to the size of committees to maintain to the overall political balance across the Council and consequential amendments to the seats available on some committees and the individual councillors appointed to serve on the various committees affected.

Allocation of Seats

The number of seats currently held on the Council by each political group and others was:-

The Council comprised 35 elected members.

The total seats available across the Council should now, in so far as is practicable, be divided between the political parties in the following ratio: 61.8% (Labour and Co-operative) 38.2% (Conservative).  The same ratio should be applied, in so far as is practicable, to the allocation of seats on each individual committee/sub-committee.  Members were reminded that at the Council’s Annual Meeting on 15^th May 2025, it had been agreed to gift a small number of seats to the Green and Independent members on the larger committees, as this would not materially affect the overall political balance.  It was not proposed to alter this arrangement, other than to note the removal of the Independent seat, which was now surplus to requirements.  Accordingly, the proposal to gift a seat would now apply only to the Green councillor.

The basic calculation to allocate seats to committees of various sizes had altered slightly from that indicated at the Annual Meeting and the new position was as shown in Table 1 below.  The changes applied to committees of the following sizes: 7, 10, 12, 13 and 15 (shaded grey in Table 1).  At the Annual Council meeting, members noted that, some adjustment to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, Leader of the Council, presenting a new Corporate Strategy for approval.

Councillor Dad provided a brief introduction to the report and outlined the consultations which had taken place.  He reported that the review process had begun with a discussion at Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee in January 2025.  Further feedback from Cabinet Members had then informed the rewrite, along with updates from the Council’s Service Managers.  Group leaders of other political groups on the Council had also had the opportunity to put forward any comments and suggestions.

The current Corporate Strategy had been agreed in 2023.  The key factors which had led to the proposed revision included:

• changes in the political administration of the Council, with some shifts in priorities; and
• significant announcements from Government around devolution and local government organisation within Lancashire.

While many of the priorities and actions outlined were a continuation, others were new.  In particular, a fourth priority had been added.  The four priorities and their supporting themes were as follows:

• Sustainable Growth

o    Employment and Business Growth

o    Revitalise our Townships

o    Housing Growth

• Environment and Climate Change

o    Reduce Fuel Poverty

o    Make the Council’s Activities Net Zero by 2030

o    Green Spaces and the Natural Environment

• A Thriving and Cohesive Community

o    Partnership Working

o    Health and Wellbeing

o    Culture, Heritage and Arts

• Embrace the Opportunities of Devolution

o    Local Partnerships and Shared Working

o    Workforce Planning and Organisational Readiness

o    Building a Stronger Place Identity

The strategy formed part of the Council’s Policy Framework as defined in the Constitution and as such needed to be adopted by the Council.

Councillor Zak Khan commented that the 2023 version of the Strategy had been developed under the previous political administration, however, most of its priorities remained relevant.  He was particularly pleased to see that the commitment to Sustainable Growth had been retained, as this reflected long-term thinking.  He also understood the need to include Devolution as a new priority.  He expressed the view that the document should be regularly checked to ensure that relevant actions were taking place.  He was, therefore, happy to support the latest version of the Strategy.

Councillor Sabir Fazal welcomed the priority on a Thriving and Cohesive Community.  Residents were living in a time when people were being set against one another.  The prevailing situation in Hyndburn had always been one of cohesion.  He hoped that inclusion of this as a priority would lead to meaningful action and demonstrate that Britain was not an ‘island of strangers’ (from a quote by the Prime Minister on 12 May 2025).

The Leader thanked Councillors Khan and Fazal for their contributions.  He added that the strategy was a working document and commented that it belonged to the whole Council, not just the controlling political group.  He also provided some examples of actions underway including the following:

• Place Strategy - due to be launched in the autumn 2025;
• Corporate Peer Challenge Action  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, Leader of the Council, updating the Council in respect of recent executive decisions taken as a matter of urgency where the decision had been exempted from the Call-In Procedure.

Rule C14 of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules set out the provisions allowing for a period of call-in by members of a relevant Overview and Scrutiny Committee, in respect of certain executive decisions.  That Paragraph included the detailed procedures which supported this arrangement.

Paragraph C14(i) stated that the call-in procedure should not apply where the decision being taken by the executive was urgent.  A decision would be urgent if any delay likely to be caused by the call-in process would seriously prejudice the Council’s or the public interest.  The record of the decision and notice by which it was made public should state whether in the opinion of the decision making person or body, the decision was an urgent one, and therefore not subject to call-in and the reason for that opinion.  The Mayor had to agree both that the decision proposed was reasonable in all the circumstances and to it being treated as a matter of urgency prior to the decision being taken.  Provision was also made for consent to be obtained otherwise in the absence of the Mayor.

In addition to the above, Paragraph C14(i) stated that decisions taken as a matter of urgency had to be reported to the next available meeting of the Council, together with the reasons for urgency.

Recent urgent executive decisions, or Cabinet decisions where the Call-In procedure had been suspended, were as summarised below.

Urgent Executive Decisions Taken

The following urgent executive decisions had been taken within the last reporting period:

(a)     Procurement of Work for Great Harwood High Street Accelerator Fund Greening Project

The decision and reason for urgency was as summarised below:

Decision (taken by the Chief Officer/Head of Service on 29^th April 2025)

Appointment of Clark & Kent to undertake works to install a pump track at Game Street, Great Harwood using High Street Accelerator funding.

Reason for Urgency

All work relating to the High Street Accelerator funding had to be completed by 30^th June 2025.

(b)     Leisure Transformation Project  - Wilson Playing Fields Site  - s.278 Agreement

The decision and reason for urgency was as summarised below:

Decision (taken by the Chief Officer/Head of Service on 9^th May 2025)

To seek approval to enter into an agreement, pursuant to Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980, with Lancashire County Council (LCC) to carry out highways works to complete the construction of the new leisure facility at the Wilson Playing Field site.

Reason for Urgency

Since Universal Civils and Build Limited (Universal) had been appointed as the replacement Contractor in December 2024, the construction of the new leisure facility at Wilson Playing Fields was progressing very well and Universal were ready to start off-site highways works as part of the development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

To receive the Minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 18^th June 2025 (attached).

Rules of Debate

·         The Leader of the Council will move the Minutes, the Deputy Leader of the Council will second the Minutes.

·         Non-executive Members will be invited to make comment or ask questions on the Minutes (5 Minutes).

·         Cabinet Members will be invited to make comments and respond to any points raised (5 Minutes).

·         The Leader of the Council will be given up to 15 Minutes to respond and to answer any questions raised.

The minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 18^th June 2025 were submitted.

The following matters were raised:

In connection with Minute 46 - Waste Transfer Station, Councillor Steven Smithson sought clarification around information published recently by Lancashire County Council (LCC).  LCC had announced that the Whinney Hill landfill site was closing and that their contract with Suez was not being extended beyond March 2026, but this information had already been released previously.  However, it was understood that landfill operations would continue at this site, which was owned by Suez.  He asked if the Council was aware of any plans in place for the future of LCC’s Altham Household Waste Recycling Centre based at Whinney Hill.

Councillor Stewart Eaves, Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services, responded that, following the end of the waste disposal contract at Whinney Hill, his preference was for the use of a waste transfer station for collected waste in Hyndburn.  Other options included use of the landfill site at Fleetwood or the waste transfer station in Bacup, but the preferred solution was use of the Suez waste transfer facility at Darwen.  He indicated that he was working hard to secure this option.

In respect of Minute 46 – Accrington Stanley FC, Councillor David Heap expressed the view that there had been no progress in recent weeks, despite councillors reporting that meetings were taking place with the club.  The issues had been on-going for over 12 months and residents were frustrated by the apparent lack of progress.  He called for the Leader of the Council to resign over this matter.

The Leader responded that the above comments were disingenuous and inappropriate.  The Council leadership’s first meeting with the club’s representatives had taken place 3 months ago and there had been much progress since then.  It was hoped that there would be some positive news within the next few weeks.  Councillor Dad indicated that a complex situation was not being helped by comments being circulated which were untrue.  He retorted that the councillor concerned might consider his own resignation.

A lengthy debate then ensued.

Councillors Steven Smithson and Zak Khan raised concerns about the following:

• Limited updates as to progress;
• The closure of the club’s leisure venue and football academy;
• The impact on businesses such as ASFC of Government policies on employer’s national insurance contributions and the national minimum wage; and
• An apparent unwillingness by the Council to listen to suggestions proposed by the Opposition to provide financial support to the club.

Councillors Andrew Clegg, Clare Pritchard, Paul Cox, Vanessa Alexander, Melissa Fisher, Stewart Eaves and Dave Parkins raised the following issues in response:

• A lack of compliance by the club with both planning and licensing rules;
• The club needing to take responsibility for their actions and needing to propose solutions to the situation;
• The minimal impact of national business policies on the club’s situation;
• A pattern of lack of engagement by the club with the Council, typified by a history  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

To receive the Minutes of committees, as set out below:

Rules of Debate

·         The Leader of the Council will introduce the Minutes as a whole.

·         Any Member may raise any issue from the Minutes; the Chair of the relevant Committee may respond (5 Minutes).

·         The Leader of the Council will close the debate (5 Minutes).

The Minutes of the following meetings were submitted:

Councillor Zak Khan asked if it would be possible to record all Cabinet and Committee meetings.  The Leader of the Council responded that this matter could be discussed at the next Leader’s Policy Development Board.

Resolved                                    -    That the Minutes be received and noted.

Report attached.

Rules of Debate

·         Each motion shall be debated for no more than 20 minutes before being put to the vote.

·         No more than one and a half hours in totality shall be allowed at each meeting for the debate of all motions.

Councillor Khan indicated that the Opposition group did not wish to engage in the debate on motions and would abstain from any vote taken.  The group had submitted two of its own motions for tonight’s meeting, which had been directly relevant to Hyndburn issues, on the subjects of a local member grants scheme and the extension of Article 4 Directions for Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) across the Borough.  However, these motions had not been accepted for inclusion on the Agenda.

1)         Standing Up for Working People and Defending Fair Terms and Conditions

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Scott Brerton and seconded by Councillor Vanessa Alexander, with support from signatories Councillors Munsif Dad and Stewart Eaves, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule A9:

“This Council recognises and commends the vital role that trade unions have played—and continue to play - in defending and advancing the rights of working people across the United Kingdom.

Thanks to the tireless work of unions and their members, we now have core protections that many take for granted:

• Equal pay for women
• Paid holidays
• Maternity pay
• Two day weekends
• Minimum wage
• Health and safety at work
• Equal opportunities
• Flexible working
• Better rates of pay
• Better sickness and pension benefits

These were not gifts from above—they were won through collective action, determination, and solidarity.

This Council further notes with concern the recent proposals by Reform UK at Lancashire County Council, which risk creating a two-tier workforce by limiting access to the Local Government Pension Scheme for new employees and imposing poor pay increases on existing staff.

Such measures undermine long-standing terms and conditions and represent an unjustifiable attack on those who deliver essential public services.

We believe all workers deserve fair pay, secure pensions, and dignity at work. Undermining staff morale and widening inequality will damage recruitment, retention, and the quality of services our communities rely on.

This Council therefore:

1. Praises the vital role of trade unions in securing and protecting workplace rights.

2. Condemns any attempts to roll back these rights through attacks on pensions, pay, and conditions—whether nationally or within Lancashire County Council.

3. Urges all staff across Lancashire County Council—and beyond—to join a recognised union as a practical step to protect themselves and their colleagues.

4. Resolves to write to the leadership of Lancashire County Council expressing this Council’s opposition to any such changes to access to the Local Government Pension Scheme or employee pay progression.”

Councillors Andy Gilbert, Shabir Fazal, Clare Pritchard, Vanessa Alexander, Jodie Clements, Paul Cox, Stewart Eaves, Clare McKenna, Noordad Aziz and Munsif Dad spoke in support of the motion and a number of those councillors spoke about their own positive experiences of working with or being supported by trades unions.

Resolved                                         -  This Council therefore:

(1)     Praises the vital role of trade unions in securing and protecting workplace rights.

(2)     Condemns any attempts to roll back these rights through attacks on pensions, pay, and conditions—whether nationally or within Lancashire County Council.

(3)     Urges all staff  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.