Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence submitted.

There were no reported declarations of interest or dispensations.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 22^nd March 2023 (attached) and the Special Meeting of Cabinet held on 31^st May 2023. (to follow).

The minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held 22^nd March 2023 and the Special Meeting of Cabinet held on 31^st May 2023 were submitted for approval as correct records.

Councillor Britcliffe, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Resources, commented that there was an apparent disparity between the comments of Councillor Munsif Dad during the two meetings, having welcomed news of the improved infrastructure planned for Huncoat at Minute 331 of 31^st March, but seeking to delay the Huncoat Garden Village development at Minute 22 of 31^st May 2023.  He asked:

• Whether the Opposition could clarify its positon about Huncoat Garden Village;
• Whether they were prepared to risk a brownfield development that protected Green Belt land; and
• Whether the local Labour group followed their national party advice to develop brownfield sites for housing, or if locally it wanted a noisy strategic rail freight interchange.

Councillor Dad responded that he had wanted a broader debate on the issue at full Council, as this was a single party Cabinet, and that the Labour position would be known when they were in control.

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

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

Councillor Zak Khan, Portfolio Holder for Economic Development and Sustainability, provided a brief verbal update of activity within his remit.  This included:

Economic Development

• A new Economic Development Manger was due to start in July;
• Meeting large-scale stakeholders, including East Lancashire Chamber of Commerce and a planned free assessment by Barclays Eagle Labs, which provided support to the UK’s entrepreneurial community;
• Continuing work already commenced to listen to businesses;
• Meeting relevant officers to discuss ideas;

Sustainability

• Considering how best to decarbonise the housing stock;
• Creating a budget for two net zero roles (for which recruitment was now taking place);
• Scoping new large-scale projects and attending an event by RV Energy in Rossendale about a decarbonised street;
• Meeting with Prospects to discuss their Church Road Solar Meadow project in Oswaldtwistle; and
• Discussing with the Coal Authority regarding use of mine water for energy.

Councillor Marlene Haworth, Leader of the Council, commented that these were all exciting initiatives.

Councillor Mohammed Younis, Portfolio Holder for Levelling Up, added that he had also met with Councillor Z Khan last week to discuss the town centre and had made contact with some prominent owners of town centre properties.

Resolved                                    -    That the verbal reports of Cabinet members be noted.

Cabinet Portfolios for 2023/24 attached, for noting.

The Leader expressed delight at having made her appointments to the Cabinet for 2023/24.  A summary of the appointees and their Portfolios was as follows

• Councillor Marlene Haworth – Leader
• Councillor Peter Britcliffe – Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Resources
• Councillor Steven Smithson – Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services
• Councillor Mohammed Younis – Levelling Up
• Councillor Kathleen Pratt - Housing and Regeneration
• Councillor Sajid Mahmood – Communities, Health and Wellbeing
• Councillor Zak Khan – Economic Development and Sustainability
• Councillor Loraine Cox – Leisure Transformation and Leisure Trust

Full details of the Portfolio Responsibilities were set out in the report.

Resolved                                    -    To note the Portfolio Responsibilities for 2023/24.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Steven Smithson, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services, about the effect that new regulations relating to the collection of bulky waste items containing persistent organic pollutants (POPs) were having on the Council’s ability to collect bulky waste items.

Councillor Smithson outlined the main elements of the report.

Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP noted the intention to report back on the new arrangements, but expressed concern that the next scheduled Cabinet meeting was not until September 2023.  The Leader advised that the next meeting would take place in July, but that the original date was in the process of being rearranged towards the end of the month.  Councillor Dad observed that the legislation had been in effect from 1^st January 2023 and queried why the arrangements had taken some six months to set up.  Councillor Smithson responded that the legislation had been implemented at very short notice and the service had tried to maintain a good level of service without the need to reorganise.  However, over time it had become apparent that a backlog was building up.  The Council would now look at the best way forward while keeping costs to a minimum.  Councillor Dad asked how any additional costs would be met.  Councillor Smithson indicated that the follow up report to Cabinet would address that matter.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) remained intact in the environment for long periods, and if not disposed of properly would become widely distributed geographically.  They accumulated in the fatty tissue of humans and wildlife and had harmful impacts on human health and on the environment.

The Environment Agency had undertaken an investigation and confirmed the widespread presence of very large quantities of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and other hazardous chemicals in both the textiles and foam of waste upholstered domestic seating. These chemicals were used as flame retardants and were now banned.

New legislation from the Environment Agency had come into effect on 1 January 2023 and this legislation no longer permitted POPs waste to be sent to landfill, which was to prevent lasting environmental harm and impacts on the food chain.  This meant waste containing POPs would have to be incinerated and must not be re-used, recycled, or landfilled.

Waste upholstered domestic seating was defined as any item of upholstered seating of a household type from households or businesses that was waste. For example sofas, sofa beds, armchairs, kitchen and dining room chairs, stools and foot stools, home office chairs, futons, bean bags, floor and sofa cushions.  Upholstery included any foam and fabric, for example textiles, leathers and synthetic leathers.

In December 2022 as a consequence of the Environment Agency legislation, Lancashire County Council as waste disposal authority in Lancashire had informed the Council (as collection authority in Lancashire) that as from 1 January 2023 bulky waste items containing POPs would have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Mohammed Younis, Portfolio Holder for Levelling Up, setting out the recommendation that had been made by the Town Centre Stakeholder Board for the Council’s submission into the National Lottery Heritage Fund (NLHF).  The report sought delegated authority to submit a proposal to the National Lottery on the basis of that recommendation.

Councillor Younis highlighted some key points within the report.

Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP welcomed the visits and support of Historic England’s Historic Places Panel.  He noted that there would be further consultations undertaken with residents and businesses if the bid was successful and that these might incur further costs.  He queried whether there was a ‘Plan B’ if the submission were ultimately unsuccessful.  Councillor Younis responded that indications were good that the submission would be successful, but this was not a guarantee.  Steve Riley, Executive Director (Environment) indicated that if the bid was successful, part of the funding would cover further consultation, as well as the design and planning works, which should take the project up to the next stage before delivery.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

 Bradshaw Advisory (BA) had demonstrated their effectiveness through working with the Town Centre Stakeholder Group/Board, Members and council officers to crystallise a new town centre vision, the production of the TCIP and the submission of the Council’s LUF bid and, more recently, UKSPF investment plan.  In June 2022, Cabinet had given approval to appoint BA to undertake further work, specifically:

• The creation of a TCIP funding strategy through the systematic review and appraisal of the different possible funding routes of interest to HBC, against each of the TCIP interventions through their award size, themes, criteria, bid timetables and any specific requirements (e.g. RIBA Stage 2 design, funding timelines).

• To provide relevant advice and detailed knowledge around other funding bids within the wider ‘Levelling Up’ agenda that may be available to the Council.

Given the Council’s LUF and UKSPF funding only provided for the acquisition of Market Chambers, plus some façade improvements and roof repairs,  BA’s funding strategy search was initially focused on identifying funding which would support the redevelopment of Market Chambers and create the proposed Heritage and Culture Centre within Market Chambers.

BA had identified the NLHF as a good fit, given the criteria for potential funding:

• up to £5m financial ask.

• must involve at risk heritage (can be objects, stories/experiences or buildings).
• must help reach a wider group of people (e.g. people from lower socio-economic backgrounds, ethnic minorities, young people).
• must offer good value for money.  The larger the financial ask of the fund the more mandatory outcomes, (set by NLHF) must be met and to a greater degree.

The NLHF application process was split into 3 separate phases: a short Expression of Interest, a more detailed Development Plan and finally a full designed, costed and ‘shovel ready’ Delivery Plan.  Each submission was assessed and if approved, the applicant was then invited to progress  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

Report attached.

Appendix D to this report, containing exempt information, appears at Agenda Item 12, in Part C of the Agenda.  The implementation of the decisions taken under Agenda Item 8 will be conditional upon the adoption of the recommendation at Agenda Item 12.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Mohammed Younis, Portfolio Holder for Levelling Up, regarding progress to date with the acquisition of interests in the Market Chambers intervention within the Council’s Levelling Up Funding (LUF) programme.

Cabinet was being invited to authorise the making of a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) under Section 226(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to acquire compulsorily land, existing rights and interests at Market Chambers where agreement could not be reached in order to deliver the comprehensive 'Accrington Acre' redevelopment which was the subject of the LUF submission.

The proposed order lands were shown (edged in red) in the draft CPO plan set out at Appendix C to the report.

This report also sought approval for the Executive Director (Environment), following consultation with the Executive Director (Legal & Democratic Services) to agree compensation and acquisition payments where this would avoid the need to compulsorily purchase interests.

Councillor Younis outlined the main elements of the report.  Members were also informed that Appendix D to the report appeared in the private part of the Agenda and that any decisions taken on the current Agenda Item would be subject to approval of the recommendation at Item 12.

Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP expressed that view that every effort should be made to liaise with the occupiers of the premises to support their relocation to alternative premises.  Councillor Younis confirmed that this was already happening and that the Council was working with them closely.

Approval of the report was a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The report provided detailed information on the following:

• Background and the need for redevelopment;
• Timescale for delivery;
• Appointment of preferred developer and partner/operator;
• Land assembly and obtaining clean title to the land;
• Description of the order land;
• Description of interests in the order land;
• The need for a Compulsory Purchase Order;
• Details of attempts to acquire interests by agreement;
• Planning;
• Funding; and
• Consultations undertaken.

Alternative Options considered and Reasons for Rejection

The Council’s preference was to acquire the Order Land by agreement with those with an interest in the Order Land.  However, this could not be guaranteed and therefore a CPO would be needed where agreement could not be reached in a timely manner.

Resolved                                 (1)   Having concluded that the acquisition of all interests at Market Chambers (43-59 Blackburn Road / 2- 4 Church Street) will facilitate the redevelopment and improvement of the ‘Accrington Acre’ within the approved strategic Town Centre Investment Plan (TCIP) and that such a redevelopment is likely to contribute to the achievement of any one or more of the following objectives:

·      The promotion or improvement of the economic well-being of the area

·      The promotion or improvement of the social well-being of the area

·      The promotion or improvement of the environmental well-being of the area

Cabinet resolves to take all necessary steps to make and secure the confirmation and implementation of a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) to acquire compulsorily all or part of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Kath Pratt, Portfolio Holder for Housing and Regeneration, seeingapproval for the disposal of the Council’s interest in the land at Charter Street.

Councillor Pratt highlighted some key points within the report

Councillor Younis welcomed this proposal, which he believed would help to solve the problem of rubbish and fly tipping on the site and would also meet the need for additional homes in the area.  Councillor Dad commented that the land had been earmarked for housing for a long time.  He noted the interest from a reputable house builder (who also had ties to another local housing development) and hoped that their homes would deliver both affordability and quality.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

In 1980 the Council had acquired 14 acres, or thereabouts, of land at Charter Street, Accrington from British Railways Board.  A number of disposals had taken place over the years predominantly to Housing Associations for the residential developments known as Howard Close and The Copse.

Since 2019 the Council had considered the disposal of the land at Charter Street for residential development and had undertaken initial discussions with a number of developers.  In September 2019 Cabinet had approved the disposal of land at the western end of Howard Close to a developer and a further report in September 2022 had confirmed the terms of that disposal.

An offer had been received from a reputable house builder to acquire the site with the intention to develop in the region of 58 units on the land shown edged red on the plan set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

Subject to the necessary planning consent being obtained, it was currently anticipated that the accommodation would be 100% affordable housing.

The developable area of the site was 1.55 acres and had been valued by the Council at £217,000 (two hundred and seventeen thousand pounds); market value for unrestricted residential development.  The prospective purchaser had accepted this valuation and wished to proceed on that basis.

The site could be considered public open space and therefore the Council would follow the requirements of Section 123 (2A) of the Local Government Act 1972, by advertising its intention to sell the land, and, before making a decision to proceed with the proposed sale, would consider any objections to the proposed disposal which might be made.

Alternative Options considered and Reasons for Rejection

The Council could choose at this stage not to agree in principle to the disposal of the site, however, this could mean forgoing an opportunity to provide affordable new housing

It should be further noted that the site had suffered from fly grazing in the past and therefore a decision not to proceed with the disposal could lead to future unauthorised occupation.

Resolved                                 -      That Cabinet:

(1)   Considers and gives in principle approval to the disposal of the land at Charter Street shown edged red on the plan set out at Appendix 1 of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Paddy Short, Chair of the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee, regarding the outcome of the Call-In of a Cabinet Decision on Hyndburn Leisure Transformation, made by Cabinet on 22^nd March 2023 and considered by the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 18^th April 2023:.

Councillor Short summarised the outcome of the Call-In process.

The Leader reminded all that the intention was to repurpose Mercer Hall.  The promise to undertake a residents survey would shortly be fulfilled and leaflets would be sent to Great Harwood households in the next few days, as well as being made available more widely on-line via Hyndburn Leisure’s website.  The public would be invited to attend meetings when the survey results became available.  Overall, this process would give the Council and Hyndburn Leisure an understanding of what the public would like for the future of the Hall and could help to support the submission of a bid for up to £1m in funding for the repurposing of the facilities.

Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP noted the importance of Hyndburn Leisure as a strategic partner for the delivery of local services and the importance of Mercer Hall as a key building in the heart of Great Harwood.  He stressed the need for all interested persons to engage in the consultation process.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

At its meeting on 22^nd March 2023, Cabinet had considered the following item “Hyndburn Leisure Transformation – Investing in the Health of Hyndburn”.  Cabinet had made the following decision:

“That Cabinet:

Agrees to replace the current Mercer Hall Leisure Facility and Wilson Pavilion with a new facility at Wilson Playing Fields, as detailed in paragraph 4.5 and supported by the Site Options Analysis Study;

and;

Agrees to progress feasibility work to repurpose Mercer Hall, to ensure that it remains a community asset”.

In accordance with the Call-In procedure for Cabinet decisions, the procedure had been activated on 31^st March 2023 by two members of the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  The Call-In had been sponsored by Councillor Colin McKenzie.  Several reasons had been given for the Call-In.  Full details had been provided in the Call-In Form, which had been included with the agenda for the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 18^th April along with the minutes of that meeting.

Councillor Colin McKenzie had presented the reasons for the Call-In to the Committee.  Councillor Marlene Haworth had presented the reasons for the original decision, and had responded to the points made on the Call-In.

Committee members had submitted questions, with responses provided by Councillors Marlene Haworth and Miles Parkinson, the Chief Executive of Hyndburn Leisure, Executive Director (Legal and Democratic Services) and Executive Director (Resources).

As part of the summing up process, outlined in the Council’s Call-In procedure, Councillor Colin McKenzie recommended:

“To refer the decision back to Cabinet for reconsideration, based on the reasons outlined in the call-in form  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Mohammed Younis, Portfolio Holder for Levelling Up, updating Members on the Council’s Levelling Up Funded (LUF) interventions and work on assembling the team required to deliver them

Councillor Younis outlined the main elements of the report,

The Leader commented that this intervention represented one of the most exciting projects in the Borough for a long time.  The programme had been developed with the help of consultants and the MP and had resulted in a significant reward of over £20m.  Councillor Haworth stated that she had a particular interest in the successful rejuvenation of the Market Hall.  Mr Riley commented that the Decant Team for the Market Hall was being put together and the leader noted that market traders would remain in situ until after the Christmas period if they so wished.  Councillor Dad asked if the Decamp Manager had now be appointed and Mr Riley confirmed that the individual was already in post and would meet with the traders next Monday.

Councillor Dad enquired about the consultation methods used and Mr Riley indicated that there had been public consultations, stakeholder meeting and dedicated sessions for those with a direct interest in the Market Hall.  Councillor Dad also asked if the Market Hall intervention would be branded as a food hall or food court.  The Leader responded that the concept would involve half of the floor space used for food, with the remainder for traditional market use.

Councillor Zak Khan thanked the Portfolio Holder and officers for their work and applauded the Council for trying to undertake something new.  Councillor Younis summed up by indicting that the £20m grant was supplemented by some £3m in matched funding and a £5m National Lottery bid, equating to some £28m in total, with the opportunity to realise additional private sector investment.  Councillor Britcliffe considered that this demonstrated the controlling administration’s vision of a prosperous future.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Cabinet had given its formal approval in support of the Stakeholder Board’s recommendations that the Council’s £23m LUF submission should focus around the following three principal interventions:

• Redevelopment to an area within the Indoor Market Hall and outdoor pavilions along Peel Street – the intervention known as Market Hall.
• Improvements and redevelopment to the properties of 43-59 Blackburn Road / 2-4 Church Street – the intervention known as Market Chambers.
• Improvements and redevelopment to the block 61-69 Blackburn Road – the intervention known as Burtons Chambers.

The last formal updates to Cabinet on the proposed Levelling Up Funded projects had been in February, recommending accepting the LUF and LCC’s match funding and the following month in March, recommending the making of a CPO where it not be possible to secure the necessary acquisition/vacant possession by agreement for Burtons Chambers.

Due to the Council continuing to undertake some essential work on the project at a relativity small financial risk before any announcements were made, officers had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Marlene Haworth, the Leader of the Council, regarding the establishment of Cabinet Committees and Cabinet Groups for the 2023/24 Municipal Year and the appointment of members to those Committees and Groups.

The Leader briefly introduced the report and invited councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP to confirm the Opposition nominations to the various seats available.  Councillor Dad indicated the Labour nominations as shown in the table below.  He also requested that the Cabinet consider making an additional seat available to the Labour Group on the Net Zero Working Group to which he would like to nominate Councillor Kate Walsh.  The Leader asked for this request to be put to her in writing and undertook to give the matter some consideration.  Councillors Smithson and Z Khan added that issues could be fed into that Working Group by councillors at any time without the need to part of its formal membership.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

In June 2015, Cabinet had established the Cabinet Committee (Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013).  The Cabinet Committee determined whether to grant, renew, revoke or vary scrap metal licences pursuant to the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013, where the applicant or licensee (as the case may be) had informed the Council that they wished to make oral representations.  Meetings took place only as and when required, but this body was needed to enable compliance with statutory requirements.

In December 2017, Cabinet had established the Cabinet Committee (Street Naming).  The Cabinet Committee met from time to time and discharged the Council’s functions in respect of the naming and renaming of streets pursuant to Sections 17 and 18 Public Health Act 1925.

In 2018, Cabinet had established the Cabinet Committee (Land and Property) to have oversight of the Council’s land and property holdings.  However, this Committee had not met for at least 18 months and the Head of Regeneration and Housing considered that this Committee was surplus to requirements.

In June 2018, the Cabinet had established the Cabinet Committee (Digital Economy).  The Committee had been intended to provide a forum for Cabinet to consider the impact of the digital economy on the Borough and its town centres in particular.  However, the Committee had not met since that date and might be considered to be surplus to requirements.

In June 2015, Cabinet had established the following three Cabinet Groups which acted in an advisory capacity to Cabinet and did not have any delegated or decision making powers:

(a)    Covenant Commemoration Working Group (formerly Accrington Pals Centenary Commemorations Group – This group had not met since its focus had shifted in 2019 from the Pals Centenary to the Armed Forces Covenant.  However, much of its role had been subsumed into the role of the Council’s Armed Forces Champion.  It was therefore recommended that the group be disestablished.

(b)    Cabinet Public Transport Group – This group had not met since November 2016 and the projects for which it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Peter Britcliffe, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Resources, updating Cabinet on activities regarding Prudential Indicators Monitoring and Treasury Management Strategy since the start of the financial year 2022/2023.

Councillor Britcliffe outlined the main elements of the report.

Councillor Noordad Aziz referred to the information in the report at Paragraphs 7.1 – 7.4 about forecast interest rates.  He noted that the Bank of England was likely to announce a further base rate rise tomorrow.  He asked what impact a rate of over 5% would have on the Council’s finances.  Councillor Britcliffe confirmed that the table set out at Paragraph 7.1 was up to date.  If interest rates rose, borrowing would be more expensive, but the return on the Council’s investments would be greater.  Martin Dyson, Executive Director (Resources), clarified that the table had been provided as at 25 May 2023.  He was aware of the various press announcements today about rising interest rates.  However, the focus of this report was mainly on performance during last year.  More information on the base rate was likely to be available in the next few days.  The concerns expressed by Councillor Aziz were acknowledged, however, the Council undertook quarterly monitoring.  The authority was not worried about debt and there might be opportunities for greater income generation.

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 prudential indicators for 2022/2023 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 full-year report to Cabinet complimented a more regular review by the Executive Director (Resources).

The indicators were purely for internal use and were 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 (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 23rd February 2022 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 2022 report.

Prudential Indicators Monitoring

Table 1 and Table 2, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report, showed the monitoring information for each of the prudential indicators, limits and statements.   They  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Peter Britcliffe, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Resources, which informed Members of the draft financial spending of the Council up to the end of the financial year in March 2023.

Councillor Britcliffe highlighted some key points within the report

Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP expressed confidence in the Executive Director (Resources) and thanked officers for their work in managing the budget.  Councillor Zak Khan noted that the capital works to provide energy efficiencies had shown a good degree of foresight and further work would now be progressed.  Councillor Aziz commented that the Haworth Art Gallery remained a stunning venue, but that its potential for income generation through weddings, etc. was potentially under-utilised and needed further promotion.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Full financial details were provided in two tables set out as Appendices to the report.

The initial draft forecast year end position for the financial year 2022/23 was a total spend of £11,989,433 against a Budget of £12,334,453.  This gave a revenue underspend of £345,020 compared to the Budget set at the start of the year.  Further analysis of these changes were shown in section 4 and Appendix A of the report.

Appendix A included a breakdown of the Forecast Outturn Variances between staffing costs, non-staffing costs and income.  Some service areas showed large variances in the breakdown figures where grant funding had been received and subsequently used to fund expenditure but budgets were not in place because the amounts were not known in advance.  In these instances, although the breakdown figures might be large, they offset each other and the overall variance was much lower, or even nil.  The largest instance of this was in the Customer Contact section under Policy & Corporate Governance.  The breakdown of variances showed £5.488m for non-staffing costs and £5.742m for income but £5.4m of both these figures related to the Council Tax Energy Rebates scheme.  Other instances where the breakdown figures were skewed in this way were:

• Environmental Services – UK Shared Prosperity Funding
• Culture & Leisure – Leisure
• Planning & Transportation – Section 106
• Regeneration & Housing – Housing Advice and Selective Licensing

The revenue underspend in year was an increase since the figure of £128,906 reported at Period 10 and was an increase of £216,114.  Further analysis of these changes were shown in section 5 and Appendix B of the report.

During 2022/2023 the Council had experienced some significant budget pressures that included an increased, nationally-awarded pay award for staff that averaged 4.6% above the original budgeted inflation figure of 2% and increases in energy and supply costs as an impact from the War in Ukraine.  All of these costs had been maintained within the overall budget set for the year and had been offset by increased investment income and other good budget management processes.

Not all work on producing the Final Accounts had been completed as yet and the Accounts were still subject to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Peter Britcliffe, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Resources, showing the progress of the 2022/23 Capital Programme.

Councillor Britcliffe gave a brief introduction to the report.

Councillor Dad BEM JP asked whether there had been any underspend in Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG).  Mr Dyson, Executive Director (Resources), reported that last year’s allocation had been overspent, but there had been a surplus from the previous year.  Expenditure in 2023/24 was also likely to exceed the allocation.  Councillor Britcliffe commented that this was extremely good news and meant that many people with a disability or elderly people were being helped to stay in their own homes.  Councillor Younis spoke about the positive impact of DFG monies, for example, for the provision of walk-in showers.  He noted that waiting lists were lengthy.  Councillor Noordad Aziz asked whether the Council could better signpost residents to this grant, particularly as this could facilitate the timely discharge from hospital of elderly people.  Councillor Paddy Short commented demand was increasing and that NHS Occupational Therapy should signpost patients to DFG on discharge from hospital.

Councillor Dad enquired about the slippage regarding he artificial cricket wicket (Page 5 of the report).  Mr Dyson undertook to provide a reply outside of the meeting.

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 £45.240m 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 largely been funded from existing resources with the exception an approval of £5m of borrowing (if required).

Outturn Position

The Actual expenditure to 31^st March 2023 was £6.564m against the latest approved full year budget of £45.240m.  This equated to 14.51% spend. 

Further details were set out in the report at Appendix 1, which showed that there was expected to be £37.670m of slippage into 2023/2024, of which £35.294m related to the Levelling Up scheme for Accrington Town Centre, the Leisure Estate Investment and Housing Schemes including Disabled Facilities Grants.

There were some scheme overspends in year totalling £33,489, however additional funding had been identified to cover the additional costs of those schemes and they had not increased the net cost within the capital programme.

The remaining schemes within the programme had identified forecast underspends of £1,005,709 due to £968,426 of works now having been incorporated into the successful Levelling Up scheme recently awarded.  The underspends were to be released back into the capital programme and £940,000 had already been earmarked to be set aside as part of the Asset Management / Fire Safety  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Peter Britcliffe, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Resources, concerning the creation of a Leader’s Budget and a Community Chest Fund for 2023/2024.

Councillor Britcliffe outlined the main elements of the report

Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP expressed concern that the report had only been published yesterday and sought an assurance that information would be provided in a timelier manner in future.  The Leader indicated that the scheme had been developed very recently and the details had only just become available.

Councillor Dad noted that the Community Chest scheme proposed referred to revenue grants only and asked if capital bids might be possible.  Councillor Britcliffe indicated that further work would take place to draft the bid criteria.  It was proposed to delete the word ‘revenue’ from the recommendation at Paragraph 2.3 of the report and to amend Paragraph 4.5 accordingly.

Members also pointed out an error at Paragraph 4.1 of the report, as the Council had 16 wards (not 15), for which the total budget should be adjusted to £80,000 (from £75,000).  Consequential amendments were noted in relation to the information at Paragraphs 2.3 and 4.9 of the report.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Leader’s Budget 2023/2024

In the past the Council had set aside a Leader’s Budget to enable the Leader of the Council to:

• Support key service providers that might be under pressure and need assistance in delivery of key vital services and facilities for the benefit of the local residents;
• Support the civic function and the delivery of events for the general benefit of the Borough;
• Fund additional Council services that enhanced the local street scene and made Hyndburn a nicer place to visit.   

It was therefore proposed that this budget be re-introduced for 2023/2024 and that a sum of £20,000 be set aside for the Leader to propose and highlight the areas for funding.  The one-off budget would be funded by utilising some small outstanding balances of earmarked reserves that no longer had identified commitments against them.

The allocation of spending from this budget would be delegated to the Executive Director (Resources) following proposals and consultation with the Leader of the Council.

The funding of the budget for 2023/2024 would be allocated from earmarked reserves where it had been identified there were small balances remaining from previous external funding.  Those remaining balances had no clawback conditions and were now available to be used by the Council or placed into the general reserve.

The funding would come from:

Note: The Green Waste EM Reserve would have a zero balance after this use. The Covid – 19 reserve will have a balance of £206,025, with the majority of this funding is still subject to spend in 2023/2024 in accordance with grant conditions.

Community Chest 2023/2024

The intention of the Community  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Steven Smithson, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services, about the proposal to introduce a weekend burial service and to request funding to implement its introduction.

Councillor Smithson highlighted some key points within the report

Councillor Sajid Mahmood noted that the Muslim community had been asking for this service for many years, but that under the previous administration no progress appeared to have been made. He congratulated Councillor Smithson, who with support from himself, Councillor Younis and the MP, had been able to introduce this service.  Councillor Paddy Short welcomed the new service and believed it would be a great asset to the community.  He asked if this would impact on the employment contracts of Borough Council staff.  Councillor Smithson responded that a private contractor would carry out the work, which included an on call facility from 8am to 11am for a same day burial.

Councillor Short asked about the timescales expected for Muslim burials and Councillor Dad responded that this was simply as soon as possible.

Councillor Younis spoke in support of the weekend burial service and noted that this would mean that Hyndburn families would no longer need to approach neighbouring authorities if a weekend burial was preferred.  He expressed disappointment that Opposition councillors had been pictured in the media, when the current political administration had introduced this service.  He noted that the service was good news for the whole community, not just Muslims.  Councillor Dad responded that the weekend burial service had been on all councillors’ mind for a long time, but that until recently, largely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, demand for the service had been uncertain.  Other elements of the process needed to be put in place by the Registrars Service and Coroners Service, which had only occurred within the last few years.  The Opposition welcomed this report.  Councillor Noordad Aziz mentioned that the cross-party Hyndburn Burial Committee had played an integral part in the development of this service and that the conversation about weekend burials had been had been prompted by some key individuals from within the local Asian community.

Councillor Smithson summed up by thanking Craig Haraben, Head of Environmental Services, for his work in developing the service and reiterated that the current administration had brought this to fruition.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The Council, as burial authority, had a duty to provide cemeteries in the Borough for residents to be buried.  Currently the Council had four cemeteries in Accrington, Church, Rishton and Great Harwood which took coffin burials, albeit Great Harwood was full for new graves and any coffin burials were undertaken via re-opening family graves.

The Council via the Cemetery Service undertook approximately 125 coffin burials per year across the Boroughs four cemeteries.  Within the Cemetery Service fees and charges there was a cost to the customer to dig a grave for a coffin burial in one of the Council’s cemeteries.

The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

Recommended            That, in accordance with Regulation 4(2)(b) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, the public be excluded from the meeting during the following items, when it is likely, in view of the nature of the proceedings that there will otherwise be disclosure of exempt information within the Paragraphs of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 specified at the items.

Details of any representations received by the Executive about why the following report should be considered in public – none received.

Statement in response to any representations – not required.

Resolved                                    -    That, in accordance with Regulation 4(2)(b) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, the public be excluded from the meeting during the following item, when it was likely, in view of the nature of the proceedings that there would otherwise be disclosure of exempt information within the Paragraph at Schedule 12A of the Act specified at the item.

In accordance with Regulation 5(6)(a) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, approval is being sought from Councillor Josh Allen, Chair of the Special Overview and Scrutiny Committee, to the following decision being made by Cabinet on 21^st June 2023, in private, on the grounds that the decision is urgent and cannot reasonably be deferred.

Exempt information by virtue of Paragraph 3 - Relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

The attached Appendix, which contains exempt information, relates to Agenda Item 8.

Recommendation

That Cabinet notes the exempt information contained within Appendix D to the Part B report on Authorisation for Making of CPO for Market Chambers (Agenda Item 8 refers).

In accordance with Regulation 5(6)(a) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, approval was obtained from Councillor Josh Allen, Chair of the Special Overview and Scrutiny Committee, to the following decision being made by Cabinet on 21^st June 2023, in private, on the grounds that the decision was urgent and could not reasonably be deferred.

Exempt information by virtue of Paragraph 3 - Relating to the financial or business affairs

of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

Members considered an Appendix, which contained exempt information relating to Agenda Item 8.

Resolved                                    -    That Cabinet notes the exempt information contained within Appendix D to the Part B report on Authorisation for Making CPO for Market Chambers (Agenda Item 8 refers).