Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Accrington. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services Democratic Services (01254) 380116/380109/380184
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apologies for absence Minutes: Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Joyce Plummer, Kath Pratt and Kate Walsh.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest and Dispensations Minutes: There were no declarations of interest or dispensations indicated on this occasion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Announcements a) Mayor b) Leader of the Council c) Chief Executive Minutes: The Mayor made the following announcements:
1) Setting the Tone for Constructive Debate
The Mayor expressed his views on the conditions which would set the tone for constructive debate at Council meetings during his term of office. He hoped that councillors would use the acronym ‘THINK’ as a guide when making their contributions. Speeches during the debate should be:
The Leader of the Council then made the following announcements:
2) Srebrenica
Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, reminded all that today was a memorial day to mark the genocide 29 years ago which had taken place in Srebrenica, in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Some 8,372 men and boys were known to have been killed and over 20,000 women and children had been displaced.
This Council had previously adopted a motion to honour the memory of those killed and to stand in solidarity with their families. In 2014, Councillor Dad had visited the area to meet with the families of victims who were still fighting for justice. Members were reminded that there was always an opportunity to make the right choice, even under the most challenging of circumstances. This Council would continue to remember and honour the victims with a view to ensuring a future rooted in peace and justice.
3) Planning Policies
The Leader indicated that he had asked officers prepare evidence based documents to support the implementation of an Article 4 Direction under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015. The direction would remove permitted development rights for Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs). The work involved preparation of policy documents against which HMO applications would be determined and would set out best practice and evidence for applications in relation to children’s care homes. The evidence-based work had already commenced and should take around 3- 4 months to complete. Implementation of the Article 4 Direction would take a little longer. Members would be kept informed as to progress.
4) LGA Peer Review
The Council would shortly be taking part in a Local Government Association Corporate Peer Review, which was designed to support continuous improvement. The process, which was sector-led, should give valuable information to members and residents about what the Council did well and what it could do to improve further. It would be delivered by expert councillor and officer peers, who would act as critical friends, supported by the LGA’s Regional Support Teams.
It was currently envisaged that the Review would take place between 28th October and 2nd November 2024. It was likely that many councillors would be involved in the review process and further information would be circulated to councillors as this became available.
5) Review by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England
The Boundary Commission had notified the Council that a ward boundary review would commence in Hyndburn later this year or early in 2025. The Commission carried out a rolling programme of electoral reviews and Hyndburn was now due for review, as one had not ... view the full minutes text for item 59. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Confirmation of Minutes To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Annual Council meeting held on 23rd May 2024 (attached). Minutes: The Minutes of the Annual Council meeting held on 23rd May 2024 were provided.
Resolved - That the Minutes of the Annual Council meeting held on 23rd May 2024 be approved as a correct record.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To deal with any questions submitted under Council Procedure Rule A2.2(vi).
One question has been received (report attached). Minutes: One question had been received. The Mayor read aloud the question as shown below.
1) Update on a Waste Transfer Centre for Hyndburn
To the Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services (Councillor Stewart Eaves) Submitted by Councillor Steven Smithson
“Is there an update on a Waste Transfer Centre for Hyndburn?”
Response:
Councillor Eaves indicated that waste transfer was a subject about which that Lancashire County Council had delayed making a decision for a number of years. This issue had effectively been passed on to the Borough Council to resolve at the eleventh hour.
Borough Council officers had met with colleagues at Lancashire County Council recently to discuss how a solution might be reached. The Leader of the Council had also met with the shadow Leader and Portfolio Holder at the County Council. They had agreed to look into the issue and feed back to Hyndburn colleagues. It remained the Council’s view that Lancashire County Council, as the waste disposal authority, should provide a suitable waste transfer facility.
The Waste Management Strategy for Lancashire 2008 – 2020: Rubbish to Resources, set out the waste partnership’s ambition, which had now been delivered in the north and west of the County, but not in east Lancashire. An e-mail had been sent to the Executive Director of Growth, Environment, Transport & Health, at the County Council asking why a waste transfer solution had not yet been delivered in East Lancashire. A response was awaited. The current situation was considered to be unfair. Ideally a suitable site could be identified either at Whinney Hill or at the Suez Resource Recovery Park, in Darwen. Hyndburn was being proactive and had already set aside £500k to help fund a waste transfer station, if necessary.
Councillor Smithson asked the following supplemental question in accordance with Council Procedure Rule A2-2.2(vi):
“Can the Portfolio Holder explain why his election campaign leaflet indicated that the waste transfer station would be located at the site of the Council’s Central Vehicle Maintenance Unit (CVMU), in Church.”
Councillor Eaves replied that, when the leaflet was distributed, information provided by the then Portfolio Holder for Housing & Regeneration, Councillor Kath Pratt, had stated that this was a possibility.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Appointments to Committees and Outside Bodies To consider and give effect to requests from the various political groups, as follows:
· Labour - a change to the membership of the Audit Committee, to replace Councillor Noordad Aziz with a non-Cabinet member, in support of the objectives as set out in CIPFA’s Position Statement 2022: Audit Committees in Local Authorities and Police. (The name of the replacement Member to be made available at the Council meeting); · Conservative - a change to the membership of the Audit Committee, to replace Councillor Kath Pratt with Councillor Danny Cassidy; · Conservative – a change to the membership of the Planning Committee, to replace Councillor Danny Cassidy with Councillor Kath Pratt; · Conservative – the appointment of Councillor Marlene Haworth to the Opposition vacancy for an observer on the Hyndburn Area Citizens’ Advice Bureau, which is included in the list of Outside Bodies. Minutes: The Mayor reminded Members that a list of proposed changes to the appointments made at Annual Council had been set out on the covering Agenda for the meeting. Subsequently, a number of other changes had been proposed and, for completeness, the full list had been circulated this evening as an Addendum to the Agenda.
The Council had a duty to give effect to the nominations to seats put forward by its constituent political groups.
Councillor Dad indicated a further addition to the list in relation to membership of the Lancashire Waste Partnership. The final list of changes was as follows:
Decision - To approve the above list of changes to appointments toCommittees and Outside Bodies.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lithium-ion Batteries Campaign Report attached. Minutes: Members considered a report of Councillor Munsif Dad, BEM JP, Leader of the Council, in support of the Electrical Safety First campaign to improve the safety of lithium-ion batteries (used in e-bike and e-scooters) and their disposal. Councillor Dad indicated that the request had been forwarded to him by the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority.
Fires caused by lithium-ion batteries in e-scooters and e-bikes had multiplied fourfold since 2020, resulting in deaths, hospitalisations, homelessness, and staggering financial losses. These kinds of batteries stored a significant amount of energy in a very small space and were much more powerful than other types of batteries.
Since 2020, there had been over 1,000 fires nationally, with nearly 200 people injured, and over a dozen fatalities. Homes had been destroyed and the cost to the UK ran into £billions. The UK was now facing a disturbing projection of nearly one e-bike or e-scooter fire per day this year, a significant leap from just over one per week in 2020.
In Lancashire, there had been a year on year rise in lithium-ion battery related fires in the last three years, and three quarters of them had involved a charger. When batteries were charged in communal areas or escape routes, a fire could quickly block the way out. On occasions batteries could fail catastrophically; they could explode and lead to a rapidly developing fire.
Lancashire fires from Lithium-ion battery 2020-23
Incident data indicated the following:
Lord Foster and Electrical Safety First (UK Charity dedicated to reducing the deaths and injuries caused by electricity), with cross-party support, were promoting The Safety of Electric-Powered Micro mobility Vehicles and Lithium Batteries Bill, to ensure greater safety in the use and disposal of lithium batteries. They aimed to get the Bill into law as soon as possible when Parliament reconvened.
This Bill had received support from many national organisations, including the National Fire Chiefs Council, most County Fire and Rescue Services, the Association of Ambulance Chief Executives, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents and the Royal Society for Public Health. In addition, two coroners had called for the law to be tightened to ensure greater safety.
Prominent voices like the National Fire Chiefs Council, local Fire and Rescue Services, insurance companies, and various organisations had issued warnings about the gravity of the lithium-ion battery situation.
The National Fire Chiefs Council had backed the charity Electrical Safety First who were now contacting all local authorities seeking support for this campaign regarding improved safety standards of e-bikes and e-scooter batteries. A change in legislation was needed to help prevent fires and ensure that the products in people’s homes were safe.
The safe disposal of lithium-ion batteries was also a key issue, as batteries thrown in household ... view the full minutes text for item 63. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The attached report was considered and noted by the Cabinet at its meeting on 11th June 2024.
Minutes: Members considered a joint report ofCouncillor Noordad Aziz, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Transformation, Education and Skills, and Councillor Vanessa Alexander, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Council Operations, updating Cabinet on the Treasury outturn position for 2023/24. The report had previously been considered and noted by the Cabinet at its meeting held on 11th June 2024.
The Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities required the Council to set Prudential Indicators annually for the forthcoming three years to demonstrate that the Council’s capital investment plans were affordable, prudent and sustainable. The Council had adopted its prudential indicators for 2023/2024 at its meeting in February 2023.
The Prudential Code required the Council, having agreed at least a minimum number of mandatory prudential indicators (including limits and statements), to monitor them in a locally determined format on a quarterly basis. This full-year report complemented the quarterly reports presented to Cabinet throughout the year and a more regular review by the Executive Director (Resources).
The indicators were purely for internal use and not designed to be used as comparators between authorities. If it should be necessary to revise any of the indicators during the year, the Executive Director of Resources would report and advise the Council further.
‘Treasury Management’ related to the borrowing, investing and cash activities of the authority, and the effective management of any associated risks. In February 2023, in the same report referred to above, the Council had also set out and then approved its current Treasury Management Strategy. This had been in accordance with the CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy) code of practice on treasury management in public services, the Council having previously adopted, via Cabinet, the then revised code of practice. Associated treasury management Prudential Indicators had been included in the February 2023 report.
Prudential Indicators Monitoring
Appendix 1 to the report had set out the monitoring information for each of the prudential indicators and limits. They related to:
Treasury Management Update
The balance sheet outturn position for treasury manage activity was set out in a table included within the report.
The table demonstrated that the Council was performing within the original targets set at the start of the year. Within the prudential indicators there were a number of key indicators to ensure that the Council operated its activities within well-defined limits. In general, the requirement was that the Capital Financing Requirement exceeded gross debt. However, in 2023/24 the gross debt had exceeded the Capital Financing Requirement. This was due to the Council having historical debt with a maturity repayment profile (meaning all principal was paid at the loans maturity date) but the accounting treatment required that the Capital Financing Requirement was reduced each year by the payment of Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP). Other Liabilities reflected finance liabilities relating to vehicles and ... view the full minutes text for item 64. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Summary of 2023/24 Call In of Cabinet Decisions by Overview and Scrutiny Committees Report attached. Minutes: Members considered a report of the Chairs of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees setting out the outcome of Cabinet decisions called in by Overview and Scrutiny Committees in 2023/24.
When a decision was made by the executive (or an individual member of the executive, a committee of the executive, an area committee or under joint arrangements or a key decision was made by an officer with delegated authority from the executive) the decision had to be published, including where possible by electronic means, and should be available at the main offices of the Council normally within 2 days of being made. Chairs of the overview and scrutiny committees would be sent copies of the records of all such decisions within the same timescale, by the person responsible for publishing the decision. If the chair of the overview and scrutiny committee was of the same political party as the executive, copies of all such decisions should also to be sent to all members of the committee.
The notice was required to bear the date on which it was published and will specify that the decision would come into force, and might then be implemented, on the expiry of 6 working days after the publication of the decision, unless an overview and scrutiny committee objected to it and called it in.
During that period, the proper officer was required to call-in a decision for scrutiny by the relevant committee upon receipt of the appropriate call-in form signed by the chair (or the vice chair in the chair’s absence) or any 2 members of the committee, and should then notify the decision-taker of the call-in. He/she should call a meeting of the committee on such date as he/she might determine, where possible after consultation with the chair of the committee, and in any case within 9 working days of the end of the 6 working day call-in period. If there was a dispute over which committee should consider the call in, the final decision would lie with the Executive Director (Legal and Democratic Services).
If, having considered the decision, the overview and scrutiny committee was still concerned about it, then it could refer it back to the decision making person or body for reconsideration, setting out in writing the nature of its concerns. The decision maker should then reconsider amending the decision or not, before adopting a final decision. If it was a Cabinet decision, it would be reconsidered at the next scheduled meeting of the Cabinet. The member who sponsored the call-in could attend the relevant Cabinet meeting to make representations on the item, as could the chair of the relevant overview and scrutiny committee, if he/she supported the call-in. If the matter under consideration was an officer decision or a decision by an individual cabinet member, it should be reconsidered within 5 working days.
If following an objection to the decision, the overview and scrutiny committee did not meet in the period set out above, or did meet but did not ... view the full minutes text for item 65. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To receive the Minutes of the Cabinet meetings held on 13th February, 13th March and 11th June 2024 (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. Additional documents:
Minutes: The minutes of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 13th February, 13th March and 11th June 2024 were submitted.
The following matters were raised in connection with the Cabinet meeting held on 11th June 2024.
Councillor Zak Khan, Leader of the Opposition, referred to Minute 22 – Appointment of Cabinet Committees and Cabinet Groups 2024/25. He enquired if the Economic Policy Forum and Net Zero Working Group would continue and offered to arrange a handover to the new Portfolio Holders. Councillor Khan also commented that the decision at Minute 24 – Long Term Plan for Towns - Funding Update, which illustrated the controlling group’s continued use of consultants, appeared contrary to their stated position. In addition, Councillor Khan repeated a comment made at the same meeting, in connection with Minute 26 – Provisional Financial Outturn Position - Revenue Budget Monitoring 2023/24, which (although not recorded in the formal minutes) had highlighted the healthy state of the Council’s finances.
Regarding Minute 22, Councillor Scott Brerton responded that the Economic Policy Forum would continue to meet. A date would be arranged shortly. He would be pleased to receive any information held by Councillor Khan.
The Leader of the Council reported that Councillor Kate Walsh was the lead for Net Zero projects. He undertook to ask her to speak directly to Councillor Khan.
Councillor Steven Smithson referred to Minute 20 - Portfolio Responsibilities. He noted the Leader’s comment that there would be a review of the system of pest control charges. Councillor Smithson reminded Members the overview and scrutiny had already reviewed the decision to introduce changes to the previous system. The changes had resulted in reduced waiting times. He considered that the system was currently working well.
The Leader responded that the pest control decision had, in fact, been called in by overview and scrutiny, which had questioned how residents could afford the service. The new administration would look again at this decision and if found to be working successfully the charges would be retained, but if not, they would be scrapped.
In respect of Minute 26, the Leader noted that the previous Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services had not addressed the funding issues around the provision of a waste transfer station, which could cost in the region of £2m. The Council was of the view that this should be the responsibility of Lancashire County Council, as waste disposal authority. However, the new administration had recently set aside £500k to begin to tackle this matter.
In respect of Minute 24, Councillor Dad clarified that there would always be times when specialist advice via consultants would be needed. However, the new administration would avoid unnecessary use of consultants. For example, the Council was not using consultants to develop the new planning policy on HMOs and had asked officers to carry out this work in-house.
Resolved - That the Minutes be received and noted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minutes of Committees 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).
Additional documents:
Minutes: The Minutes of the following meetings were submitted:
Resolved - That the Minutes be received and noted.
The Mayor thanked all for their attendance and closed the meeting.
|