Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Loraine Cox, who would ordinarily have attend the meeting to speak in relation to Agenda Item 10 – Grant to Citizens Advice, as Chair of the Communities and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

There were no reported declarations of interest or dispensations.

To approve the Minutes of the meetings of Cabinet held on 30^th November (Special Meeting) and 7^th December 2022.

The minutes of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 30^th November (Special Meeting) and 7^th December 2022 were submitted for approval as correct records.

In respect of Minute 212 of 7^th December 2022 – External Project Director: Levelling Up Fund, the Leader of the Council, Councillor Miles Parkinson OBE, reported that this appointment related to the proposed projects at Burtons Chambers, the Market Hall and Market Chambers.  Three candidates had been invited to give a presentation to an interview panel, which had included consultants Bradshaw Advisory.  The successful appointee was Gretta Starks, who had experience as Head of Place and Communities, Rider Levett Bucknall (RLB).  Her portfolio included involvement in successful development projects such as East Manchester, Eastlands, Beswick Village, ERDF projects in Belfast, Manchester Life in Ancoats and work with various NHS hospital trusts.  A start date in February was currently being finalised.

Resolved                                    -    That the Minutes be received and approved as a correct record.

To receive verbal reports from each of the Portfolio Holders, as appropriate.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Miles Parkinson OBE, provided an update on the various funding bids and plans for regeneration and growth.  These included:

• Partnership with Lancashire County Council, which would realise up to £19m in Hyndburn from their £55m Levelling Up Fund (LUF) allocation.  This would support their Liveable Neighbourhoods project (including raised table crossings, cycling, walking routes, children’s safety and lighting schemes); other cycle projects; public transport and traffic signalling upgrades.  The Leader also outlined his longer term aspiration to provide a 1 mile link road from Alan Ramsbottom Way to Dunkenhalgh Way to alleviate congestion at the Hare and Hounds traffic lights.
• The Council’s successful LUF bid for £23m.  This would enable work to commence on 3 of the 18 projects identified in the Town Centre Investment Plan (TCIP).  2 of the 18 projects (park and ride and footpath improvements) had subsequently been rejected following consultations.  The 3 projects selected, Burtons Chambers, the Market Hall and Market Chambers, had been chosen because they closely matched the Treasury’s funding criteria and stood the greatest chance of success.  Only 1 in 4 bids across England had been successful and Bradshaw Advisory and the stakeholders deserved the credit for this achievement.  The TCIP process had been transparent the list of stakeholders had been published in the main document.  Miranda Barker, Chair of the Chamber of Commerce, had led the welcome to the Accrington of the Prime Minister and Chancellor on 19^th January 2023.  It was acknowledged that this investment was only the beginning of the regeneration journey, which would be partnership and business led.  The Leader thanked the officers and other stakeholders who had been involved in this bid and emphasised the importance of presenting a united front in order to attract businesses to work with the Council.  A preferred partner for the Market Hall project would be selected with a track record of regenerating market spaces.  Similarly investment in Burtons Chambers would create a high quality entrepreneurial workspace.
• The UK Shared Prosperity Fund previously announced would contribute some £3m across various sectors and investment would again be business led.
• Leisure Transformation would see a planning application submitted soon for a £12m development at Wilsons Playing Fields.  An additional £5m was also set to be invested elsewhere, including in Hyndburn Leisure Centre.  The Leader of the Opposition had undertaken some good work as a member of the Board for a number of years.  With Ken Moss now in this role, the Board had gone from strength to strength and Hyndburn Leisure had reduced its annual subsidy from the Council by around £1m.  The Board aspired to improve the quality of sport provision, work with schools and attract additional funding.  Leisure trusts countrywide were envious of Hyndburn.  It was unfair to criticise Hyndburn Leisure for its ambition.  If the Trust did not carry out this role the burden of maintaining the infrastructure and staffing would return to the Council.
• The Local Plan contained aspirations too.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 260.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Miles Parkinson OBE, Leader of the Council, regarding the Council Tax Base for the financial year 2023-2024.

Councillor Parkinson summarised the content of the report and highlighted the changes proposed to the Council Tax Base for the Borough and the Parish of Altham.  Both figures showed an increase.  This was, in part, due to housing growth which had focused on the reuse of brownfield sites.  Members were reminded that the Keepmoat housing development in Great Harwood had been controversial, but had delivered tangible benefits, including the new Showground and the improved facilities for Great Harwood Rovers FC.

On the matter of sports and wellbeing, the development at Higham Playing Fields had been controversial too, but had led to a £3m investment, with a new extension to the facilities due to open soon.  The Council would continue to engage with Accrington Stanley FC and the Accrington Football and Sports Club in connection with the use of King George V Playing Fields.  Discussions would also take place with Lancashire County Council and business leaders about the possible development of a Youth Zone for Hyndburn, like those in Blackburn and Burnley.

It was noted that the Council had been able to use the 50% premium on Council Tax for properties left empty for 2 years to encourage owners to bring them back into occupation.  This has resulted in some 500 less empty properties since the premium had been introduced.

Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP welcomed the increase in the Council Tax Base, which had gone some way to making possible a 0% increase in Council Tax for 2023/24.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

In accordance with Section 35 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, the Council was required to formally determine the Council Tax Base for 2023/2024 prior to 31^st January 2023.  This allowed the Council to notify the major preceptors (Lancashire County Council, the Police and Crime Commissioner for Lancashire and Lancashire Combined Fire Authority) by the 31^st January of the Council Tax Base.

The requisite calculation had to be carried out in accordance with the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 2012.  Once determined the Council Tax Base could not be changed and had to be used when the Council set their Council Tax for the financial year 2023/2024.

The calculation of the Tax Base for Hyndburn and Altham for 2023/2024 was detailed in the Appendices to the report.  It was proposed that the Tax Base for Hyndburn 2023/2024 should be 21,945.  This was an increase from last year’s Tax Base of 895 (21,050).  The 2023/2024 Tax Base for Altham was 317, which was an increase from last year’s Tax Base of 7 from 310.

The Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 2012 specified formulae for calculating the Council Tax Base which had to be set between the 1^st December 2022 and the 31^st January 2023.

The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 261.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Joyce Plummer, Portfolio Holder for Resources, regarding a proposed amendment to the Rules, Regulations and Procedures for Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing to remove the upper age limit to which hackney carriage and private hire vehicles could remain licensed.

Councillor Plummer highlighted the main issues contained within the report.  The proposals would allow responsible owners with well-maintained vehicles to continue to operate them as taxis beyond the current 15 years maximum age limit.  However, public protection was the main concern.  A vehicle would still need to be under 10 years old when first licensed.

Councillor Dad recalled that both he and Councillor Plummer had served on the Taxi Liaison Committee, which listened to the views of the trade.  There now appeared to be a change of direction nationally about the maximum age of vehicles, which he was happy for the Council to support.  He also agreed that a trial period would be useful.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Under Section 47 and 48 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act. the Council might attach to the grant of a hackney carriage and private hire vehicle licence such conditions as the Council might consider reasonably necessary.  Any person aggrieved by a condition could appeal to the magistrate's court.  In pursuance of the above Sections the Council had attached the following conditions to hackney carriage and private hire vehicle licences:

'When a car already licensed by this Council reaches 2 years of age it will be required to pass the Council’s vehicle examination test twice yearly.  Any vehicle over the age of 2 years will only be issued with a 6 month plate.  When a vehicle reaches 10 years of age it will be subject to the Council’s vehicle examination test three times per year and it will only be issued each time with a four month licence, with the exception of electric or hybrid vehicles which will be issued with a 6 months licence up to the age of 15 years.  When a vehicle reaches the age of 15 years it will cease to be licensed.'

A consultation had recently been carried out with the taxi trade and members of the public to consider whether the upper age limit to which a vehicle could remain licensed should be removed.  This was as a result of a request from some elected members and some members of the trade and was based on drivers’ complaints about the financial difficulties of having to buy newer vehicles.  However when making a decision members should be minded that the Council’s main concern should be for public safety.

The DFT had issued Guidance relating to vehicle age as set out below:

'Age Limits. It is perfectly possible for an older vehicle to be in good condition. So the setting of an age limit beyond which a local authority will not license vehicles may be arbitrary and inappropriate.  But a greater frequency  ...  view the full minutes text for item 262.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Joyce Plummer, Portfolio Holder for Resources, providing updates on activities around Performance Indicator Monitoring and Treasury Management since the start of this financial year.

Councillor Plummer introduced the report which was largely technical in nature.  Borrowing had been maintained at the estimated level of £1,431k.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

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 current prudential indicators at its meeting in February 2022.

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 and frequency.  This half-year report to Cabinet complemented a more regular review by the Deputy Chief Executive.

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 and cash activities of the authority, and the effective management of any associated risks.   On 24^th February 2022 in the same report referred to above, the Council also set out and then approved its current Treasury Management Strategy.  This had been done 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 were included in the February 2022 report.

Prudential Indicators Monitoring

Table 1 and Table 2 (in the Appendix to the report) showed the monitoring information for each of the prudential indicators, limits and statements.   They related to:

·           External debt overall limits – Table 1;

·           Affordability   (eg implications for Council Tax) – Table 2;

·           Prudence and sustainability  (eg implications for external borrowing);

·           Capital expenditure; and

·           Other particular indicators for Treasury Management.

Treasury Management Update

The current Treasury position was as follows:

As could be seen from the above table, the authority 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 CFR exceeded gross debt.  However, in 2022/23, the gross debt would exceed CFR.  This was due to the annual  ...  view the full minutes text for item 263.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Joyce Plummer, Portfolio Holder for Resources, providinginformation on the financial spending of the Council up to the end of November 2022 and the financial forecast outturn position for the Accounting Year 2022/23.

Councillor Plummer highlighted the anticipated positive variance at the end of the financial year, in the sum of £153,000.  The figure reflected the higher than anticipated staff pay award, raised energy costs and other inflationary pressures during the year.  However, good financial management and some financial support from the Government had helped.

The Leader reiterated his earlier comments about economic growth in the Borough providing additional income to the Council.  Councillor Dad indicated that staff should be thanked for their efforts and that particular thanks was owed to Joe McIntyre, Deputy Chief Executive who was due to retire shortly.  Martin Dyson, Executive Director – Resources would continue this good work.  The Leader thanked Councillor Dad for his positive comments.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The financial detail of the report was provided as a table at the end of that document.

The latest forecast spend to the end of the financial year in March 2023 was £12,181,000 compared to a Budget of £12,334,000.  This forecast produced a positive variance of £153,000 by the end of the financial year.

Environmental Services were predicting a year-end adverse variance of £170,000 and the main variances were:

Waste Services were predicting an adverse variance for the year of £152,000.  This was due to £73,000 of additional staffing costs, £76,000 of increased costs in vehicle fuel and waste supplies and a predicted decline in income of £3,000.

The Parks & Cemetery Service was forecasting a positive variance of £114,000, due to additional income of £162,000 largely from burials and cremations netted off by other vehicles and supplies and services costs of £105,000 and staffing savings of £57,000.

The Town Centre & Market Budget was predicting an adverse variance of £7,000, with £10,000 of additional income less £17,000 of additional staffing costs. 

Other Environmental Health and Maintenance services were predicting an adverse variance of £125,000 due to reduced income of £13,000 and increased operating costs largely around vehicles and depots of £96,000, plus additional staffing costs of £16,000.

Culture and Leisure Services were indicating a positive variance of £123,000.  Service expenditure on Leisure was forecasting a positive variance of £125,000 through reduced management fees, while the Haworth Art Gallery was predicting an adverse variance of £2,000 due to increased expenditure on staff of £6,000, and £16,000 of additional expenditure less £18,000 additional income.

Planning & Transportation were predicting an adverse variance for the year of £187,000.  This was due to predicted unfinanced additional spend on agency / salary costs of £144,000, £27,000 of extra miscellaneous costs and £16,000 forecast fee income shortfall.

Regeneration & Property Services were predicting an adverse variance of £62,000 at year-end.  This was due to £26,000 of additional staffing costs, £87,000 of increased costs largely due to external consultancy  ...  view the full minutes text for item 264.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Joyce Plummer, Portfolio Holder for Resources, informing Members of the progress of the 2022/23 Capital Programme.

Councillor Plummer indicated that the Council had approved its Capital Programme for 2022/23 at its meeting on the 24^th February 2022.  The total value of the capital expenditure authorised in the budget in February 2022 had been £38.594m and this had been increased to £45.132m with carry forward projects from the previous year and new in-year authorisations.  The current predicted spend against Budget was £7.27m with £37.886m to be slipped into 2023/2024 leaving a small overspend of £23,800 in year that it was hoped would be funded from an additional grant claim.

The Leader commented that the programme of some £45m was significantly more than the usual £1m amount set aside annually.  However, the reason for this was the availability of grants to fund some major projects.  As mentioned earlier in the meeting, additional grants were anticipated in 2023/24 in respect of the Huncoat Garden Village (£30m), Heritage Lottery Funding (£5m) and funding from a cultural organisation based in Yorkshire (£5m).

Councillor Britcliffe asked if there was a backlog in delivering Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) projects to enable vulnerable people to remain in their own homes.  Mark Hoyle, Head of Regeneration and Housing, responded that there was no longer any backlog, but there was an active waiting-list which was being worked through.  Councillor Dad noted that around £1m DFG money remained unspent and he asked if the Council could improve uptake.  Mr Hoyle acknowledge the importance of supporting those in need, but this was a demand led service.  Currently, no one was missing out on funding or waiting too long for access.  The Council regularly reached out to those who might use the service and swiftly processed any requests received.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The Council had authorised a capital programme of £38.594m at its meeting on the 24^th February 2022 and the programme had subsequently been increased to £45.132m upon the authorisation of the carry forward of projects from the previous year and a variety of in-year authorisations using existing internal funds or new external funding.  The programme had been largely funded from existing resources with the exception an approval of £5m of borrowing (if required).

Spend to date had been £2.498m which was equivalent to 34.4% of the final forecast spend in year.  There were 47 individual projects underway across the Council at this time.  In addition to the actual spend to date, there was a further £4.886m forecast to be spent in year.

The forecast total spend against all the capital projects was now £7.270m, with an estimated £37.862m of spend to be slipped into the next financial year. The forecast slippage included £35m relating to the Accrington Town Centre Levelling Up Project and the Leisure Estate Investment Project.

There were 3 projects that were indicating a negative variance at this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 265.

Report of Councillor Loraine Cox, Chair of the Communities and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, attached.

Members considered a report ofCouncillor Loraine Cox, Chair of the Communities and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, about the vital support provided to residents by Citizens Advice Rossendale and Hyndburn and seeking Cabinet support to continue to provide financial and other support to the service.  Councillor Carole Haythornthwaite, a Member of the above Committee, was in attendance to present the report in the absence of Councillor Loraine Cox.

Councillor Haythornthwaite outlined the key elements of the report, including the valuable work of the Citizens Advice Bureau.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

At its meeting on 14^th December 2022, the Communities and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee had carried out a short review of the service provided by Citizens Advice Rossendale and Hyndburn, who had submitted an annual report to the Committee.

In their report and presentation to the Committee, Citizens Advice Rossendale and Hyndburn had provided the following information.

·           People’s health, education, work and social lives had been affected in ways that could never have been imagined before COVID-19 and the current cost of living crisis.  The Citizens Advice service was a charity and had delivered independent and impartial advice for over 80 years.  They were at the forefront of advice delivery.  The Citizens Advice service across Hyndburn had highly-trained, professional and experienced advisers assisted by trained volunteers, available to help with any issue, whoever contacted them and whatever their problem. They also had many specialist caseworkers who could provide information, signposting and complex casework in Welfare Benefits, Energy, Money & Debt, and Housing.

·           They remained located in the New Era centre on Paradise Street and received a grant from Hyndburn Borough Council of £25,000 per year.  This enabled them to leverage further funding from:

-     The National Lottery for dealing with clients in a crisis;

-     Energy companies for energy related advice to reduce usage and energy debt;

-     Henry Smith Foundation funding for homeless prevention advice; and

-     Money and Pensions Service for debt and money advice.

·           Advice had been provided to 1,577 Hyndburn residents in the past 12 months and over 1,800 Hyndburn residents had been unable to make contact via telephone this year due to unprecedented demand for the service and lack of paid advisors due to a lack of funding.  Volunteers had also worked on the advice line but the cost of recruiting, training and supervising a volunteer was over £1,000 each.  They had a volunteer team of 20 volunteers and 12 full time paid advice staff across Rossendale and Hyndburn. Energy related queries followed by debt and personal independence payments had been the top 3 enquiry issues since October 2022.  They had attracted the highest ever number of people contacting them for charitable support and food bank assistance with a 50% increase since 2021.

In addition to the grant from Hyndburn Council, Rossendale Council provided a grant of £35,000 per year, paid for an additional part time specialist debt advisor for Rossendale residents and provided  ...  view the full minutes text for item 266.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Kath Pratt, Portfolio Holder for Housing, Health and Wellbeing, which outlined the Affordable Warmth Grant funding being made available to district councils by Lancashire County Council (LCC) to deliver affordable warmth interventions to individuals who were most vulnerable to harm from cold or damp homes.  The report sought approval to enter into a grant agreement with LCC to receive a grant allocation of £76,409 for winter 2022-23.

Councillor Pratt highlighted the key issues within the report.

Councillor Peter Britcliffe asked whether the Council would be in a position to spend all of the grant allocation.  He noted that advice from various official agencies was that homes should ideally be heated to at least 18°C.  Councillor Munsif Dad commented that the timescales were short and that any money would need to be distributed quickly.  The Leader of the Council responded that there was sufficient demand to enable all of the grant to be used and this would need to be targeted quickly at the most vulnerable.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

This funding aimed to reduce levels of death and illness over the winter months and to improve peoples’ wellbeing.  As a consequence it was hoped to see a reduction in hospital admissions and reduced pressure on health and social care services.

Being on a low income, living in thermal inefficient home, having higher heating needs, and high fuel costs could all increase the risks of living in a cold home.  The funding was aimed at those most vulnerable to harm from cold or damp homes in Lancashire.  This could include a wide range of individuals who either were, or were at serious risk of, experiencing poor health and wellbeing due to a cold home.

Households would be eligible for funding if they met at least one of the following vulnerabilities and had a low income, as follows:

Vulnerabilities:

·           people with a diagnosed cardiovascular conditions;

·           people with a diagnosed respiratory conditions (in particular, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and childhood asthma);

·           people with diagnosed mental health conditions

·           people with diagnosed disabilities;

·           older people (65 and older);

·           households with young children (up to the age of 5);

·           pregnant women;

·           people who were terminally ill;

·           people with suppressed immune systems (e.g. from cancer treatment or HIV); and

·           people who had attended hospital due to a fall.

The following vulnerable groups would be considered on referral from a professional organisation:

·           people who moved in and out of homelessness;

·           people with addictions; and

·           Recent immigrants and refugees.

Low income

Low income could be confirmed in one of the following three ways:

·           Someone being in receipt of means tested benefits;

·           Having a total household income not in excess of £31,000; or

·           A 'declaration' by the Local Authority or health / social care professional that affordability issues were present.

Districts had the further option to support people that did not have a specific vulnerability, but did have a significant low income  ...  view the full minutes text for item 267.