Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Ethan Rawcliffe.

There were no declarations of interest or dispensations made on this occasion.

To approve the Minutes of the meetings of Cabinet held on 19^th November (Special Meeting) and 3^rd December 2025.

The minutes of the meetings of Cabinet held on 19^th November (Special Meeting) and 3^rd December 2025 were submitted for approval as correct records.

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

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

Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Sport

Councillor Kimberley Whitehead reported on the following:

Woodlands Care Home, Clayton-le-Moors

An announcement had been made this morning by the Leadership of Lancashire County Council that the authority would not be closing any of their care homes or daycare facilities across the County.  However, there were some concerns being voiced by trades unions and political parties that the message was ambiguous.

Information from the Chief Executive of Lancashire County Council had clarified that staff had not been notified of any decision and that no formal position had currently been adoptedby the Council.  Councillor Whitehead expressed concern that there was still the threat of privatisation of the facilities and that staff still required some assurance about their future employment.  She noted that hundreds of people had turned up at a protest over the weekend, including representatives from all political parties, with the exception of the Reform party.

Councillor Munsif Dad responded that, overall, this was good news and a step in the right direction.  The support of the public and cross-party political groups had certainly helped.  He hoped that the leadership of Lancashire County Council would listen to the feedback and would keep these facilities open.  Councillor Zak Khan added that a number of Conservative councillors had also attended the protests and that he was pleased to note the latest position.

UK Town of Culture 2028

Details of the submission process for the newly created UK Town of Culture for 2028 had been published by the Government last week.  This could potentially bring investment into Hyndburn.  The Borough already had a Culture and Heritage Team, a Panel and Strategy, so was well placed to submit a bid.  At this stage, it was unclear whether the submission would be for Hyndburn as a whole or for one town within the Borough.  Lessons could be learned from neighbouring Burnley, which had recently announced its Burnley 2027 Year of Culture initiative.

Expressions of interest were required by the end of March 2026.  More information about this ambitious proposal would be provided in due course.

Portfolio Holder for Business, Growth and Sustainability

Councillor Scott Brerton reported on the following:

Economic Policy Forum for Hyndburn

A meeting of the Economic Policy Forum for Hyndburn had taken place last week and had been extremely positive, even more so than last year’s event.  The main concerns raised included the increase in the minimum wage and commercial landlords increasing rents.  Against this background, some businesses had reported having their best December in recent years.  The hospitality sector had noted that recruitment was improving.  Accrington and Rossendale College representatives had welcomed the Government’s Industrial Strategy, which would fit well with the NW Construction Technical Excellence College (CTEC), led by Wigan and Leigh College, along with formal partners Blackpool and The Fylde College and East Lancashire Learning Group (Accrington and Rossendale College’s parent organisation).  The initiative could deliver 40,000 skilled workers by 2029.

Councillor Zak Khan commented  ...  view the full minutes text for item 277.

Report attached.

The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, Leader of the Council, informing Members of the Council Tax Base for the financial year 2026/2027.

The Leader provided a brief introduction to the report, highlighting the figure for the Borough’s Council Tax Base in 2026/2027 (22,183) and the figure for Altham Parish Council (319).

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 2026/2027 prior to 31^st January 2026.  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 (Appendices A and B to the report) 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 its Council Tax for the financial year 2026/2027.

The calculation of the Tax Base for Hyndburn and Altham for 2026/2027 was included as Appendix A to the report.  It was proposed that the Tax Base for Hyndburn 2026/2027 should be 22,183.  This was an increase from last year’s Tax Base of 20 (22,163).  The 2026/2027 Tax Base for Altham, as set out in Appendix B to the report, was 319, which was a decrease from last year’s Tax Base of 320.

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 2025 and the 31^st January 2026.

The Council Tax Base was the measure of the number of chargeable dwellings held on the valuation list as at the 10 September 2025 and then adjusted to take account of discounts, exemptions, re-bandings and Council Tax Support to arrive at the Authority’s Council Tax Band D.

The Council Tax Base also took into account the Council’s intention to apply a local exemption for Lancashire County Care Leavers, up to their 25^th birthday from 1^st April 2026.

The report had also included a copy of a Customer First Analysis as Appendix C.

There were no alternative options for consideration or reasons.

Resolved                                 (1) That Cabinet notes and approves the report.

(2) That Cabinet agrees:

(a)  That in accordance with the Local Authorities (Calculation of Tax Base) Regulations 2012, the amount calculated by the Council for its Council Tax Base for the financial year 2026/2027 shall be 22,183.

(b)  That in accordance with the Local Authorities (Calculation of Tax Base) Regulations 2012, the amount calculated by the Council for the Council Tax Base for the parish of Altham for the financial year 2026/2027 shall be 319.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Vanessa Alexander, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Council Operations, providing an update on the Council’s treasury management activities for the current financial year till Quarter 3 (Q3).  The report outlined the performance of investments and borrowing, assessed compliance with the approved Treasury Management Strategy, and highlighted any emerging risks or opportunities that might impact the Council’s financial position.  Overall, the report supported effective budget monitoring and ensured transparency and accountability in the management of public funds.

The Leader of the Council introduced this report on behalf of Councillor Alexander, due to her recent dental appointment.  Councillor Dad outlined the background to the report, the level of short-term investments and interest rates secured, the Council’s approach to risk, interest rate forecasts, additional interest anticipated and the impact of investment returns on the Council’s overall budget.

Councillor Khan commented on Table 1 at Paragraph 4.2 and noted that the Total External Debt and Capital Finance Requirement at Q3 were broadly similar figures which offset each other.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Local authorities were required to manage their borrowing, investments, and cash flows in a way that was affordable, prudent, and sustainable.  This was governed by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Prudential Code and the CIPFA Treasury Management Code of Practice, which together set the framework for how councils planned and monitored their capital financing and treasury activities.

As part of this framework, councils had to set Prudential Indicators each year to support decision-making around capital investment and borrowing.  These indicators helped demonstrate that the Council’s plans were financially sound and that risks were being managed appropriately.

The Council also adopted a Treasury Management Strategy annually, which outlined how it would manage borrowing, investments, and cash balances throughout the year.  Regular monitoring reports were required to track performance against the strategy and indicators, and to provide assurance that treasury activities remained aligned with the Council’s financial objectives.

Borrowing Activities During The Period

Table 1 below showed the current borrowing position at Q3 2025/26 compared with the original estimate.  The increase in finance leases relating to vehicle purchases had increased the liability and Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) totals.

Table 1 – Comparison of latest position with the original estimate as at Q3 2025/26:

The Council continued to operate within the borrowing limits and targets set at the start of the financial year.  A key measure in the Prudential Indicators was the relationship between the Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) and the Council’s gross external debt.

The CFR represented the total amount the Council had needed to borrow over time to fund capital investment — such as buildings, infrastructure, and equipment.  It reflected the underlying need to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 279.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Vanessa Alexander, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Council Operations, providing an update on the Council’s financial performance up to the end of December 2025 for the 2025/26 financial year and outlining the projected impact on the Medium-Term Financial Strategy covering the period 2025/26 to 2027/28.

The Leader of the Council introduced this report on behalf of Councillor Alexander.  Councillor Dad highlighted the forecast surplus for the year 2025/2026, the cost pressures faced throughout the year offset through treasury management income streams, significant variances, the provision made to deal with any potential liabilities and the level of and use of reserves.  The Leader was pleased to note that the Council’s finances were on track through close budget monitoring and good management.

Councillor Khan made the following observations and asked various questions as follows:

• Waste Services were predicting an £61k underspend.  Could the saving be reallocated to enforcement activity?
• The announcement at Council on 15^th January 2026 about progress on the Waste Disposal contract was welcomed, as this should mean the no large financial investment would be required.
• The overall forecast underspend of £0.594m was good news.  Would the controlling group consider spending this in year?
• Would the controlling group consider reducing the level of unallocated reserves?
• Could the controlling group advise what the funding deficit would be following the Fair Funding Review 2.0 and the Government’s subsequent provisional financial settlement for Hyndburn?

Councillor Dad responded that further information about the draft Budget would be available at the next Cabinet meeting.  The Fair Funding Review outcome would still lead to a reduction in grant income from the Government, but the change was not as significant as had been first anticipated.  The full implications would be considered during the Budget setting process in February.  The Council would need to manage any shortfall and hence needed to be prudent in relation to expenditure within the last few months of 2025/26.

Councillor Eaves reported that a two-year waste disposal contract had been signed by Lancashire County Council with Envirofuel Ltd.  From 1^st April 2026, waste would be taken to their existing processing facility at Accrington Road, Hapton, in Burnley.  Councillor Dad confirmed that there would be no additional cost to Hyndburn Borough Council for this service.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

At the Full Council meeting on 27^th February 2025, Full Council had agreed the General Fund Revenue Budget for 2025/26.  This had set a budget for the Council’s total spend in 2025/26 of £17.313m, plus £0.121m use of reserves, in lieu of business rate receipts.

The current forecast spend to the end of the financial year in March 2026 was £17.106m, with forecast funding increasing to £17.700m.  This brought the forecast underspend for the year against the budget to £0.594m.  Further analysis of changes in forecast spend were shown in Section 4 of the report.

Table 1 below showed the working budget and forecast outturn by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 280.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Vanessa Alexander, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Council Operations, providingan update on the delivery and financial performance of the capital programme as at Quarter 3 (Q3) of 2025/26, highlighting progress against budget, identifying any variances, risks or slippage, and forecasting the expected outturn.  Overall, the report supported effective decision-making, ensured transparency and accountability, and informed any necessary adjustments to project timelines, funding allocations, or future financial planning.

The Leader of the Council introduced this report on behalf of Councillor Alexander.  Councillor Dad highlighted the amounts of new additions to the programme at the start of the year, items carried forward from the previous year and new authorisations in year forming the final scheme approvals of £56.351m.  He also outlined the slippage into future years and forecast spend in-year as a percentage of the capital budget for 2025/26 (72.7%).  In addition, he drew members attention to the sources of funding, as well as risks around the shortfall in capital receipts and from potential areas of spending not currently contained within the capital programme.  The programme was central to the Council’s need to maintain and develop its assets and its ambition to achieve key corporate objectives for the benefit of local residents.

Councillor Khan made the following observations and asked various questions as follows:

• Appendix 3 of the report set out slippage into future years, for example expenditure on Wilsons Playing Fields Drainage, Hyndburn Leisure Centre Efficiencies and the Market Hall development.  Was this linked to a lack of staff capacity, expertise or delays affecting delivery of the project?  The Conservative Group had proposed additional project staff during the last Budget process.
• In connection with Paragraph 5.2 of the report, on the Levelling Up Town Centre projects, what was the ‘challenge referred to?

Councillor Dad responded that the Council’s organisational review had sought to introduce more streamlined systems and structures.  In general, all capital programmes gave rise to an element of slippage.  However, the planned projects would all be completed in due course.  The employment of additional staff would not provide a solution to slippage of the type identified.  The controlling group would make additional staff available where this was necessary to support service delivery.  Overall, he was confident that the programmed projects would be successfully delivered.  Regarding the Levelling Up Town Centre projects, the finish date for the Market Hall would still be in 2026, but there had been a need to reconsider the facility’s operator.

Councillor Pritchard added that a new operator for the Market Hall had now been identified.  The initial preferred operator had parted company with the Council amicably, in part, due to insufficient funding being available to carry out the proposals as originally envisaged.  Other delays had been caused by the discovery of further asbestos on site.  The Council was currently seeking additional stall holders for the development and the majority of stall holders in the temporary cabins were expected to return to the Market Hall.  She offered to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 281.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Stewart Eaves, Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services, updating Cabinet about progress made relating to the introduction of weekly food waste collections to all domestic properties in Hyndburn by 1^st April 2026.

Councillor Eaves gave a brief introduction to the report and commented that the roll out of caddies was going well.  He was looking forward to the commencement of the pilot scheme for councillors.  Councillor Dad added that the Council would keep a close watch on how the new service was performing and any ‘teething problems’ would be addressed quickly.

Councillor Khan welcomed the new service and commented that many councils already collected food waste.  He noted that this would be new to the people of Hyndburn and asked whether vulnerable groups such as the elderly would have wrap-around support.  Councillor Eaves responded that support was available for those in need and added that the Council would be sensitive to the fact that the system was new to residents.  However, most people should adapt quickly.

Councillor Brerton added that, although some sections of the public were against food waste collection, the feedback received locally on social media had been mostly positive.  This comment was echoed by Councillor Khan.  The Leader was pleased to note that the caddies were now being rolled out to all residents.  Councillor Eaves summed up by stating that any negative feedback had been outweighed by the positive comments received and that, overall, the scheme was the right thing to do for the environment.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Section 57 of the Environment Act 2021 had named food waste as a recyclable waste stream for the first time.  It also stated that recyclable household waste which was food waste must be collected at least once per week.

Further guidance from the Government had stated that the provision of food waste collections had to be in place by 1^st April 2026 for each local authority in England.

To help facilitate this the Department for Environment, Food and  Rural Affairs (Defra) had provided some funding to help local authorities with the cost of introducing and continuing with food waste collections.  There were three tranches of funding: capital funding for the procurement of vehicles and containers, transitional funding to roll out food waste containers and information about collections and revenue funding to pay for the future costs of food waste collections.

To date Defra had provided local authorities with the capital funding and the transitional funding.  The revenue element had been included in the financial settlement for the financial years 2026/27 and beyond.

Lancashire County Council, as waste disposal authority, had informed district councils that they intended to process food waste via anaerobic digestion rather than in-vessel composting.  As such, food waste could not be mixed with green waste and would have to be collected separately.  This would mean each household would need a kitchen caddie for food waste collection and a kerb  ...  view the full minutes text for item 282.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Stewart Eaves, Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services, seeking approval to increase the fines for breaching section 33(1)(a) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (fly tipping on public land) and for breaching section 46(1), (3)(c),or (d), or (4) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (not using the correct waste receptacles when disposing of waste which was a section 46 requirement)

Councillor Eaves gave a brief introduction to the report noting that the proposals had taken some 12 months to finalise and outlining the increases to the fines for the different types of breaches indicated.

Councillor Munsif Dad welcomed the proposals.  Councillor Pritchard spoke about the impacts of fly tipping on certain wards and noted that despite the best efforts of the Waste Services Team to clean up after these incidents, illegally dumped litter reappeared on almost a daily basis.  Councillor Fisher also welcomed the new charges and enquired about how the changes were being communicated to the public.  Councillor Eaves responded that he would work with the Council’s Communications Manager to provide some appropriate publicity.  Members noted that there had been a short feature on the BBC regional news yesterday, which had highlighted increased penalties in both Hyndburn and Sefton Councils.

Councillor Zak Khan confirmed his support for penalising offenders and for publicising the increased fines in order to deter potential offenders.  However, he was concerned that criminals would find a way to circumvent these measures.  Before issuing fixed penalty notices, first the Council would need to collect sufficient evidence.  He agreed that the Waste Services Team did a good job, but asked if more support could be made available, for example:

• There were only 2 enforcement officers for the Borough.  Should additional staffing be provided?
• Where did the fines income go and could this be used in a way which deterred further fly tipping?
• As noted at Minute 280 above, Waste Service currently had a £61k underspend.  Hyndburn residents might prefer this to be spent.  Could this be utilised to deter fly tipping?

Councillor Eaves responded that the controlling administration would continue to consider a wide range of options to deter fly tipping.  He had already looked into the possible employment of another enforcement officer, but recruitment was likely to be problematic due to uncertainties around local government reorganisation.  The Leader of the Council confirmed that any income received from fines would be invested back into the Waste Servies Team.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Hyndburn Borough Council had for many years had a proactive approach to the waste and recycling collection service provided to Borough residents.

Recycling was important because it conserved natural resources, saved energy, reduced pollution and reduced the amount of waste sent to landfill or incinerated.

The Council’s Waste Services Team was the most efficient district Council in Lancashire for the collection of dry recyclate (glass, cans, plastic, paper and carboard) having a 26% recycling rate for those items.

In addition to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 283.

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Ethan Rawcliffe, Portfolio Holder for People and Communities, seeking approval for the adoption of the Equality and Diversity Strategy 2026-2030.

In the absence of Councillor Rawcliffe, Councillor Kimberley Whitehead, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Sport, gave a brief introduction to the report.  She noted that the strategy had last been reviewed in 2020 and that there was now an opportunity to update elements of the document, particularly in the light of data from the 2011 Census.  The strategy provided a framework for decision making and would embed equality across the evaluation of major projects and day to day services.  The strategy was not just about legal compliance, but was about the Council being fair and effective.

Members welcomed the strategy.  Councillor Fisher spoke of her experience of a close family member with ADHD who was often labelled as ‘naughty’ during her childhood.  Hyndburn’s strategy would recognise such neurodivergence.  Councillor Dad highlighted the Council’s recognition and adoption of definitions for antisemitism and islamophobia, noted at Section 3.5 of the strategy.

Councillor Khan commented that the strategy was a core document, but had been in need of an update as Hyndburn’s demography had changed over time.  In particular, he noted the 5% increase in the ethnic minority population and the better understanding of disability leading to increasing numbers of residents and staff identifying themselves as having a disability.  However, he did express some scepticism about impact of the strategy alone.  The Actions set out at Section 9 of the strategy tended to focus on monitoring and training.  He expressed a desire to understand what outcomes would be achieved, such as what the document might mean in practice for someone who was disabled, or gay, or from the ethnic minority population and whether community cohesion be enhanced.  Overall, he believed that the Borough was harmonious, as had been evident following the stabbings and deaths in Southport in July 2024.

Councillor Pritchard also noted the increasing numbers of residents with a disability and commented that disability covered a wide range of conditions.  There were many disabled people in work.  The Borough had a good record of cohesion and inclusivity, but sometimes it was difficult for neurodivergent individuals to feel included.  She welcomed the revised strategy and the Council’s track record on equality and diversity.

Councillor Whitehead added that the strategy was not a comprehensive list of all the work taking place around inclusivity.  It was part of many other Council strategies and was embedded in other activities too.  The wider outcomes were reported to overview and scrutiny.  She agreed that no strategy should be produced just for the sake of it, but should lead to real outcomes.

The Leader of the Council summed up by noting that there would be challenges within the Borough from time to time.  The incident in Southport had tested community cohesion nationally and locally.  In Hyndburn, diverse groups had come together to maintain good relationships.  The Council had a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 284.