Agenda and draft minutes

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

He also announced he sad passing of former councillor Nick Collingridge.  Nick was an independent councillor who had served the residents of Clayton-le-Moors for 10 years between 2006 and 2015.

A minute’s silence was observed as a mark of respect.

Councillors Melissa Fisher, Judith Addison, Dave Parkins and Bernard Dawson provided their reflections on his life and achievements as a local councillor, which included the opening of Mercer House for use by a voluntary group and the establishment of a drop-in centre in Barnes Square.  All members offered their sincere condolences to his family and friends.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Mike Booth, Steve Button and Kate Walsh.  Apologies were also submitted on behalf of Councillor Scott Brerton, who would miss the start of the meeting, but who was expected to be present later in the evening.

Members were informed that Councillor Mike Booth had recently undergone a routine surgical procedure and was now recuperating.  The Mayor, on behalf of all councillors, wished him a speedy recovery.

In connection with Agenda Item 10 (Motion 2) – Urgent Review of the Article 4 Direction across Hyndburn, Councillor Melissa Fisher made the meeting aware that her husband owned an existing House in Multiple Occupation (HMO), details of which were included in her Register of Interests.  The Motion, as drafted, did not directly relate to or affect that interest.

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)         Local Government Association Peer Challenge Review

Councillor Dad was pleased to be able to update the Council on the outcome of the recent LGA Peer Challenge Review.  The peer group had identified strong progress, with all actions either completed or underway.  Good progress had been made on the Council’s main strategic priorities, including the Accrington town centre interventions, Huncoat Garden Village and the Wilson Sports Hub.  Staff engagement was good and officer/member relationships were strong.  Further work was required to address the predicted financial challenges ahead and in supporting both staff and members in preparation for Local Government Reorganisation.

The Peer Group’s final report would be available shortly and would be provided to the Cabinet.  Councillor Dad thanked all who had participated in the review process, including officers and the cross-party working group.

2)         Pride in Place Programme

The Leader of the Council reported that the Government had announced some additional funding on top of the £20m provided (over ten years) under the Plan for Neighbourhoods funding.  The Pride in Place Impact Fund (PiPIF) would set aside a further £1.5m for the Borough.

The programme would be community led and should help local people to deliver improvements, for example, to parks, empty buildings and high streets.  Residents could send their ideas to the Council and, in some cases, might sit on the Board which would help to shape the improvements.

David Welsby, Chief Executive, added that the Council had only received this news after 6pm today.  Further details would be shared, as soon as possible.

3)         Draft Local Plan – Examination Stage

Members were informed that the examination stage of the draft Local Plan had been underway since last Monday.  The six day hearing phase had now been completed.  The Council would now have to create a schedule of work with timescales.  An interim report from the Inspector should follow within a few weeks.  The overall aim of this stage was to determine if the draft Plan was sound.

A further 6 weeks’ consultation would take place on any modifications made under this process.  Cabinet approval would be required to the modifications made.  The Inspector should then issue a final report.

4)         Recognition of Palestine

Councillor Dad reported that the UK Government had recently recognised the State of Palestine and the inalienable right of its citizens to self-determination.  This was in line with justice and international law.  The Labour Muslim Network had been campaigning for a decade on this matter.  An estimated 70,000 people had been killed in Gaza since October 2023.

The Government was being urged to press for an arms embargo, sanctions and action from the International Court of Justice (ICJ).  Local councillors would continue to raise their voice on this issue.

The Mayor indicated that he had received a request from Councillor Shabir Fazal OBE to make a brief statement and that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 160.

To confirm as correct, the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 10^th July 2025.

The Minutes of the Council meeting held on 10^th July 2025 were provided.

In respect of Minute 83(6) – Question Time - King George V Playing Fields, Councillor David Heap thanked Councillor Stewart Eaves for his reply and noted that he had agreed to meet with him, local residents and representatives of Accrington Wildcats Amateur Rugby League FC.  No meeting had yet taken place.  Councillor Eaves responded that the take up of the lease was still being negotiated with a preferred lessee.  It would not be appropriate to arrange a meeting with other interested groups until those discussions had concluded.  He noted that the Wildcats had been content with the continued use of the Wilson Sports Hub, but might have been unsettled by the premature mention of the possible leasing of King George V Playing Fields.

In connection with Minute 83(10) Question Time – Accrington Neighbourhoods Board, Councillor Heap indicated that he was pleased to note that a new independent Chair, Sami Smithson, had been appointed to the Board.  He asked if a plan was now being worked on and, if so, whether the new Chair had read the draft Plan for Neighbourhoods and had been in a position to digest the information available.  Councillor Dad responded that he too was pleased to welcome Sami Smithson to the Board and was glad that other councillors supported this appointment.  Her first meeting would take place next week.  The first item was the draft Plan for Neighbourhoods. The Chair had already received all of the relevant paperwork.  Once the plan had been approved, it would be submitted to Government before the deadline of 28^th November 2025.

Regarding Minute 87 - Minutes of Cabinet (Minute 46 – Accrington Stanley FC), Councillor Heap noted that the Leader had indicated that progress was being made and that positive news might be available soon.  He asked what news was available.  Councillor Dad responded that this subject had been raised on several occasions.  ASFC was an important community club.  He had attended an event there a few days ago at which football shirts, funded by the Council, had been distributed to local children.  The club’s Chief Executive Officer, Warren Eastham, had met with the Council’s party and their subsequent press release had highlighted the good working relationship between the club and the Council.  Both sides would continue to try to resolve all of the issues identified previously.

In respect of Minute 89(3) - Motions on Notice – Welfare Motion, Councillor David Heap queried whether there had been any positive outcomes as a result of the resolution agreed about proposed welfare reforms.

In connection with Minute 87 - Minutes of Cabinet (Minute 46 – Accrington Neighbourhoods Board), Councillor Khan also noted that Sami Smithson was the new Chair and considered that this was a good appointment.  He expressed disappointment that he had not received further information about the appointment process for the previous Chair.

Regarding Minute 83(4) – Question Time – Council Owned Garages, Councillor Zak  ...  view the full minutes text for item 161.

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 12noon on Monday 22^nd September 2025.  (Report attached)

Rules of Debate

·         Up to 30 minutes will be allowed for this item.

·         Questions will be put by the chair of the meeting and will receive an oral answer.

·         Questions which cannot be put within the allotted time will receive a written answer within 10 working days.

Nineteen eligible questions had been received, which were set out in the report.  The Mayor confirmed that he would read out the questions as submitted.

The Leader of the Council expressed his appreciation for the questions submitted, both by councillors and members of the public, but noted that the time was now 7:45pm.  The total time allowed for questions and answers to be put was 30 minutes, which would limit the opportunity to give any detailed responses.  Accordingly, all of the questions would receive a written reply.  He considered that it was important to provide a full reply to all who had raised a question.

He reminded all present that questions could be asked, at any time, about everyday Council services and policies via the Council’s normal contact facilities.

The Mayor reiterated that, notwithstanding, the above, he was obliged to read out the questions in accordance with the Constitution.

1)         Skip Days

To the Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services (Councillor Stewart Eaves)

Submitted by Councillor Clare Pritchard on behalf of Mr C Martino

“Could the portfolio holder please provide an update to Council on the recent skip days?”

Response:

Councillor Eaves indicated that a written reply would be provided.

2)         Council Reserves

To the Portfolio Holder for Resources and Council Operations (Councillor Vanessa Alexander)

Submitted by Councillor Steven Smithson

“How much money does this Council have in its reserves?”

Response:

Councillor Alexander referred to a recently published report and indicated that a written reply would be provided.

3)         Great Harwood High Street Accelerator Plan

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

Submitted by Councillor Zak Khan

“Following the successful roll out of £45,000 in grants for shop improvements in Great Harwood, will you roll this out this across the whole Borough and offer the same opportunity to other towns?”

Response:

Councillor Dad indicated that a written reply would be provided.

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

Councillor Khan commented that the Leader of the Council appeared to be refusing to answer the substantive question and asked if he could answer it now.

The Leader reiterated that a written reply would be provided.

4)         Local Nature Recovery Strategies

To the Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services (Councillor Stewart Eaves)

Submitted by Councillor Zak Khan on behalf of Vinette Davitt

“How is Hyndburn engaging in the new Local Nature Recovery Strategies? - A new system to map the best opportunities for restoring nature to help focus efforts and target funding.”

Response:

Councillor Eaves indicated that a written reply would be provided and reminded all that routine questions could be submitted via the Council’s Contact Centre.

5)         King George V Playing Fields

To the Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services (Councillor Stewart Eaves)

Submitted by Councillor David Heap

“Please could the portfolio holder give an update on the reopening of King George’s playing fields?”

Response:

Councillor Eaves indicated that a written reply would be provided.

6)         Accrington Cemetery

To the Portfolio Holder  ...  view the full minutes text for item 162.

The Council has duty to give effect to the wishes of a political group in relation to appointments to committees and other bodies in accordance with s16(1) Local Government and Housing Act 1989.

Details of any requests received from the various political groups for consideration will be made available at the meeting (see Addendum attached).

Members were informed that the Council had duty to give effect to the wishes of a political group in relation to appointments to committees and other bodies in accordance with s16(1) Local Government and Housing Act 1989.

The Council was invited to consider and give effect to a request from the Labour and Co-operative group, as follows:

The appointment of the following members to the Standards Committee: Councillors Noordad Aziz, Clare Pritchard and Kimberley Whitehead, to replace Councillors Stephen Button, Bernard Dawson and Ethan Rawcliffe and the appointment of Councillor Noordad Aziz as Chair.

There were no additional requests for changessubmitted at the meeting.

Councillor Zak Khan expressed disappointment at the changes being made to the membership of the Standards Committee, as he considered that the existing members were working well together.  He was particularly supportive of the Chair, Councillor Stephen Button, who he considered to be fair and impartial in his approach.  The role of Standards Committee member, required decision-making based on sound judgement and independence from political motivations.  He expressed concern that the changes were being made to politicise the committee.

Councillor Clare Pritchard considered that the above remark was unwarranted.  She gave an assurance that she would not politicise the role, if appointed, and that she would act fairly along with any Opposition members.  She added that Councillor Button had stepped down as a result of changes to his work schedule.  Another member had stepped down due to university commitments.  In any event, the Standards Hearings Panels also comprised an independent member.

Councillor Noordad Aziz commented that he was being proposed as Chair.  He was currently Chair of the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee and was supportive of cross-party working.  He asked that the remark about politicisation be withdrawn.

Councillor Kimberley Whitehead indicated that she had served on the committee previously and considered herself to be fair.  Hearing Panels would not be constituted to include members who had an interest in the particular matter complained of.

Councillor Dad summed up by affirming the nominations proposed, which the Council was required to accept.  He asserted that the councillors and Chair put forward were experienced members and would act in a professional manner.

Resolved                                    -    To approve the appointment of the following members to the Standards Committee: Councillors Noordad Aziz, Clare Pritchard and Kimberley Whitehead, to replace Councillors Stephen Button, Bernard Dawson and Ethan Rawcliffe and the appointment of Councillor Noordad Aziz as Chair.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Melissa Fisher, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Housing and Communities, advising members of the outcome of a recent consultation relating to proposed changes to the taxi licensing policy in relation to the mechanical testing of hackney carriages and private hire vehicles, and seeking approval for a change to the Taxi and Private Hire Licensing Policy which would allow mechanical testing to be carried out externally.

Should the decision be made to proceed with the proposed changes, Members would be invited to approve the suggested criteria for a testing station to become approved (as set out at Appendix 1 to the report), to approve fees for testing stations to become approved and to approve a maximum number of testing stations in the Borough – the recommendation being 4 or 5.

Councillor Fisher referred members to the detail within the report and advised the Council of a minor change to the wording of Paragraph 2.1, which she then moved as the first paragraph of the Substantive Motion.

The report set out the following information:

Current Position

Provisions within the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 permitted district councils to grant licenses to vehicle proprietors to use a vehicle as a hackney carriage or private hire vehicle.

Under Section 50 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 any hackney carriage or private hire vehicle licensed by a district council had to present for inspection and testing on no more than three occasions during any one twelve month period.  The primary reason for this legislation was to maintain public safety, both in respect of taxi passengers and other road users.

Currently in Hyndburn vehicles up to the age of 2 years when tested would be issued with a 12 month licence.  Any car over the age of 2 years of age would be required to pass the Council’s vehicle examination test twice yearly and would be issued with a 6 month licence each time.  When a vehicle reached 15 years of age it would be subject to the Council’s vehicle examination test three times per year and would be issued with a 4 month licence each time.

The inspection and testing was currently undertaken by staff employed by the Council and based at the Council’s Vehicle Maintenance Unit (CVMU) located on Library Street in Church.  The tests were booked via the Council’s licensing team.

In addition to the standards required for a class 4 MOT test by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), the Council had additional supplemental standards which vehicles had to pass in order to be licensed by the Council.  The supplementary testing manual supplemented the Rules, Regulations and Procedures for Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing and had been established so as to ensure that all vehicles licensed by Hyndburn Borough Council were of a high standard and were suitable, safe and fit to be licensed by this authority to transport members of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 164.

Councillor Pritchard raised a point of order in connection with a post about the Question Time item that had just appeared on social media, which she considered amounted to a misrepresentation by a councillor of what had transpired during the consideration of that business.  The Mayor considered that this was not a valid point of order, as it did not relate to a Council Procedure Rule, but that the issue of misrepresentation could potentially be raised as a standards matter.  The Chief Executive added that there was no Council Procedure Rule which prevented councillors from using personal communication devices during meetings.

To receive the Minutes of the Cabinet meetings held on 26^th March, 30^th July and 10^th September 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 26^th March, 30^th July and 10^th September 2025 were submitted.

The following matters were raised:

In connection with the Cabinet meeting on 26^th March 2025, Minute 399 - Reports of Cabinet Members – Oak Hill Park Bowling Greens, Councillor Kimberley Whitehead had spoken to the bowlers recently and had heard a disappointing comment that an Opposition member had indicated that the controlling group was not supporting the project to provide perimeter fencing.  In fact, the Labour group was fully committed to this project.  A tender exercise had been completed and the plans had now been approved.  Councillor Munsif Dad added that he too was disappointed at the apparent spreading of misinformation and hoped that the individual would be held accountable.  Councillor Heap commented that he had recently visited the bowlers at Oak Hill Park, when they had won the bowling league.  They had expressed their gratitude that the fencing was due to be erected, as the greens had previously suffered some damage due to vandalism.  The club members had also enquired if there was any more funding available to erect a small shelter for use by those keeping score.  Councillor Eaves confirmed that the fencing was due to be erected and that he would look into whether any funding might be available for a shelter.

In respect of the Cabinet meeting on 26^th March 2025, Minute 406 – Bullough Park Community Woodland Enhancement, Councillor Whitehead was pleased to see the investment in this park.  Phase 2 would create paths and steps and develop a pond and wetlands.  A celebration event was due to take pace in early December.  The final improvements would see cricket return to the park and a survey of the pavilion had now been carried out.  The intention was to bring back a local cricket team, a move which she believed had not been supported by the Green Party.  Councillor Dad reiterated that the controlling group would continue to invest in this scheme.

Regarding the Cabinet meeting on 26^th March 2025, Minute 408 – Oswaldtwistle Civic Theatre Working Group, Councillor Whitehead reported that it had been planned to hold a meeting of the Civic Working Group, but this had not been necessary.  A revised date was now being scheduled for November/ December 2025.  Several expressions of interest had been received from persons who wished to be included in the Working Group.  The roof survey report had now been completed.  Significant remedial works would be required which would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds.  The project was out to tender and the closing date was 13^th October 2025 at 2pm.  Local contractors were encouraged to apply.  The Council had already set side £500k for repair works and £110k had been received from Theatres in Trust.  There remained strong local support for the reopening of the Civic.

In connection with the Cabinet meeting on 26^th March 2025, Minute 400 – LGA  ...  view the full minutes text for item 165.

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:

In respect of the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 23^rd July 2025, Minute 103 – Apologies for Absence, Councillor David Heap noted that no apologies had been submitted on behalf of a portfolio holder who had not been present for a particular item of business.  Asked the Leader of the Council if portfolio holders were expected attend overview and scrutiny meetings and if they should present apologies if unable to attend. 

Councillor Smithson recalled that there had been some good open debate at the above meeting, but that during the one particular item of business (Performance Review Report) the officer present had been unable to answer some questions in relation to specific details of services being monitored.  The officer had undertaken to report those questions back to the relevant services, but to date no follow up information had been received by members of the committee.

Councillor Munsif Dad indicated that he was not aware of any instances of a portfolio holder not attending an overview and scrutiny committee, if invited.  The Leader had himself attended overview and scrutiny committees and he was certain the portfolio holders would also attend, as necessary.  He indicated that following any meeting, where officers had not subsequently provided responses to unanswered questions, the matter should be referred to the Leader, so that he could chase up a reply.

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.

The Mayor confirmed that all motions submitted had received the minimum number of signatories required (or higher).  He then called upon the mover of the first motion to speak.

Given that the time was now 8:55pm and there were four motions to debate, Councillor Smithson asked if the Mayor now wished to seek the consent of the meeting that the proceedings continue beyond 10:00pm, under Council Procedure Rule A7.  The Mayor considered that it would be premature to determine that question at this stage.

The meeting was then adjourned for 5 minutes to allow members to take short break.

1)         Live streaming of Meetings

The following motion was proposed by Councillor David Heap and seconded by Councillor Zak Khan, with support from signatory Councillors Steven Smithson, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule A9:

“This Council requests that the Cabinet consider making arrangements for all council meetings to be live streamed online for public viewing, this includes full council, cabinet and scrutiny meetings.”

Councillors Mohammed Younis, Steven Smithson, Zak Khan spoke in favour of the motion on the grounds of transparency.  Councillor Kimberley Whitehead, Andy Gilbert and Munsif Dad spoke against the proposals, noting that livestreaming was desirable, but that the Leader’s Policy Development Board had considered this on several occasions and had concluded that the set up costs (in the region of £110k) could not be justified; there were other financial pressures on the Council; local government reorganisation might reduce the usage of the Council Chamber; and, in any event, members of the public regularly posted video recordings of the meetings on social media.

Councillor Heap summed up by querying the detailed costs within the quote and stating that the public wanted to be able to view meetings on line.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule A6.5, six councillors present called for a recorded vote, the outcome of which was as follows.

For (10)

Councillors Judith Addison, Josh Allen (Mayor), Loraine Cox, Peter Edwards, David Heap, Zak Khan, Joyce Plummer, Steven Smithson,Tina Walker and Mohammed Younis.

Against (18)

Councillors Vanessa Alexander, Heather Anderson, Noordad Aziz, Scott Brerton, Andrew Clegg, Jodi Clements, Paul Cox, Munsif Dad BEM JP, Bernard Dawson MBE, Stewart Eaves,Melissa Fisher, Andy Gilbert, Clare McKenna, Dave Parkins, Clare Pritchard, Ethan Rawcliffe, Kimberley Whitehead and Clare Yates

Abstain (0)

Nil

Accordingly, the MOTION was LOST.

2)         Urgent Review of the Article 4 Direction Across Hyndburn

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Steven Smithson and seconded by Councillor David Heap, with support from signatories Councillors Loraine Cox and Zak Khan, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule A9:

“This Council calls on the Cabinet to urgently review its decision regarding the implementation of the Article 4 Direction for Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) across Hyndburn, and to provide a clear, transparent explanation as to why seven wards have been excluded from this policy.”

The following AMENDMENT was moved by Councillor Munsif Dad and seconded by Councillor Melissa Fisher:

The substitution of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 167.

The Mayor thanked all for their attendance tonight and reported that the next meeting of the Council would be held on Thursday 13^th November 2025 at 7:00pm.

At this meeting, the Council would be able to discuss the varying models and business cases in respect of Local Government Reorganisation in Lancashire and any recommendations from the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

On 19^th November, Cabinet would take the final decision on Hyndburn’s preferred option in time for the Government’s deadline of 28^th November 2025.