Agenda item

To deal with any questions submitted under Council Procedure Rule A2.2(vi).

 

Details of any eligible questions received will be circulated following the expiration of the deadline for the receipt of questions.  Questions must be submitted by no later than 12noon on Monday 10^th November 2025.  (Report attached)

 

Rules of Debate

 

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

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

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

Eleven eligible questions had been received, which were set out in the report.  The Mayor read out the questions as submitted.

 

1)         Bullough Park Changing Rooms

 

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

Submitted by Councillor Shabir Fazal OBE

 

“The changing rooms at Bullough Park have been closed for a considerable period.  Could the Council provide an update on what plans or actions are in place to refurbish these facilities and ensure they are reopened for future community events and sporting fixtures?”

 

Response:

 

Councillor Dad reminded members that there was a lot of investment currently being made in Bullough Park.  The pavilion was part of the overall work planned for the park.  At the moment, the Council was considering its options and any future pans would need to be linked to what funding was available.  The Leader wished to see the pavilion back in use, particularly as the park was in his own ward.  It would be good to support grassroots cricket at this location.

 

Councillor Fazal did not wish to ask a supplementary question, but thanked the Leader for the investment in Bullough Park.  The site had been a sporting hub in the past, but in his view had been allowed to decline.  There were now two midweek and two weekend cricket fixtures.  The park could support cricket in the summer and football in the winter, but the closure of the pavilion meant that this could not currently happen.  It was imperative to reopen the changing facilities as a priority.  Councillor Dad indicated that he shared this ambition, but did not accept that the park had been run down.  For example, some £60k had been spent on a children’s play area within the last 3-4 years.  However, there had been some funding challenges during the period of austerity under the previous Government.

 

2)         Stickerless Private Hire Vehicles for Safety

 

To the Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder Housing and Regeneration (Councillor Melissa Fisher)

Submitted by Councillor Shabir Fazal OBE on behalf of Sohail Asghar

 

“Wolverhampton also allows stickerless private hire vehicles to reduce the risk of vandalism and break-ins during off-duty hours.  Will Hyndburn consider a similar policy to protect drivers and vehicles, particularly those parked overnight in residential areas?”

 

Councillor Fisher thanked the Councillor Fazal and the member of the public for the question.  The Council’s Licensing Manager had a good working relationship with colleagues in Wolverhampton.  The reason that Wolverhampton had changed their policy to remove the need for operator door signs / logos was not related to risk of vandalism or break ins.  The reason was to allow private hire drivers to work for multiple operators.  Private hire operators licensed with Wolverhampton were still permitted to require their drivers to display logo door stickers if they wished, however Wolverhampton Council neither required nor prohibited it.

 

Hyndburn’s policy allowed drivers to display magnetic operator door logos, which still allowed them to work for multiple operators, and the magnetic signs could be removed when the driver was not working.  Some form of exterior permanent “sticker” stating that the vehicle was not insured unless pre-booked was a legal requirement for all private hire vehicles.  It was not clear how Wolverhampton had legally removed this requirement.

 

Overall, exterior livery allowed for easier identification of private hire vehicles by both authorities and members of the public, and was especially important when members of the public were accessing vehicles.  It was also important (as well as a legal requirement) to ensure that passengers were aware that private hire vehicles must be pre-booked.  In the interest of public safety, the Council had no current plans to change the requirement.  In fact, the majority of Local Authorities required some form of markings on the doors.

 

The Mayor advised that no supplementary question could be asked in the case of questions submitted on behalf of the public.

 

3)         Proposed Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) – Application No. 11/24/0389 – Knuzden Moss Farm

 

To the Leader of the Council (Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP)

Submitted by Councillor Zak Khan on behalf of Vinette Davitt

 

“The Planning Inspectorate has overturned HBCs decision to vote down the proposed BESS system in Stanhill, Oswaldtwistle.  Will the Council support residents in seeking a judicial review, to prevent setting a precedent of significant infrastructure on our greenbelt when more suitable urban, brownfield sites exist?”

 

Councillor Dad indicated that the Council would always work with residents to support them within the overarching legal framework.  Planning application 11/24/0389 had been considered by the Planning Committee on 16^th April 2025.  After reviewing recent national planning decisions, appeal outcomes, and the Government’s updated planning policy - including the introduction of the concept of the ‘grey belt’ - officers had recommended approval, as there were no substantive planning reasons to justify refusal.

 

However, members of the Planning Committee had resolved to refuse the application due to concerns about the impact on the Green Belt.

 

The Planning Inspectorate had subsequently overturned that decision on appeal.  A Judicial Review could only be pursued where there was evidence that the decision-maker had made a legal error.  Having reviewed the Inspector’s report carefully, officers did not consider that any such legal error had been made.  Consequently, there were no grounds on which the Council could lawfully seek a Judicial Review.

 

While the Council understood residents’ concerns about protecting the Green Belt, it must also act within the legal framework that governed planning decisions and appeals.

 

4)         Fly Tipping

 

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

Submitted by Councillor Zak Khan

 

“Given the lack of uptake for recent skip days and the fact that it is fly-tippers that cause a stain on our communities, would the monies spent on this initiative not be better spent on more fly tipping deterrence measures such as cameras?”

 

Councillor Stewart Eaves indicated that the Council was currently considering a number of measures to be put in place to try and reduce fly tipping.  Cameras were one of the tools available and he would have like to support their wider use.  However, they were not economically viable.  By way of example, it had taken around two months to complete the necessary measures to install one such camera in Oswaldtwistle.

 

Councillor Khan asked the following supplementary question.  He was pleased to note that the intention was to increase fines, but since evidence was required, cameras would help to support his approach.  He asked if the Portfolio Holder would consider a localised solution for littering hot spots.  The cost of cameras could be offset by the release of officer time.  Councillor Eaves undertook to discuss this suggestion further with the Cabinet.

 

5)         Community Township Funding

 

To the Portfolio Holder for Transformation and Town Centres (Councillor Clare Pritchard)

Submitted by Councillor Steven Smithson

 

“Community Township Funding for £80,000 was agreed at the budget - please can an update be provided on when a report will be brought to Cabinet and how the scheme will work?”

 

Members were informed that, in the absence of the Portfolio Holder, a written response would be provided.  Councillor Heap commented that, as this was an item in the budget, some information should be readily available, particularly as to whether the funding would be split evenly between the townships.  The Leader Council responded that the funding was being distributed via the Cabinet Action Fund.  The relevant Portfolio Holder would provide a more detailed response.

 

6)         Oakhill Park Bowling Greens

 

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

Submitted by Councillor David Heap on behalf of Robert Rothery

 

“Please could the portfolio holder give the exact dates of when work will start on the protective fence around Oakhill bowling club?”

 

Councillor Stewart Eaves indicated that the fence for the bowling green at Oakhill Park was currently being manufactured by a local company based in Rishton.  It would be installed between January and March 2026 and completed in time for the start of the bowling season.

 

7)      Accrington Stanley FC

 

To the Leader of the Council (Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP)

Submitted by Councillor David Heap on behalf of Andrew Buckel

 

“Please could the Leader of the Council give an update on progress to a resolution with regards to the Accrington Stanley planning issues?”

 

Councillor Dad thanked the resident for their question.  Councillors continued to work collaboratively with both Accrington Stanley FC and residents to resolve the planning issues.  A meeting had taken place with the club in the last few weeks and the Council was continuing to have that dialogue.  The Council had some statutory responsibilities, but was continuing to work with the club and residents.

 

8)      Local Elections 2026

 

To the Leader of the Council (Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP)

Submitted by Councillor David Heap on behalf of: Kevin Laycock

 

“Please could the Leader confirm if May’s 2026 local elections will be going ahead in Hyndburn?”

 

Councillor Dad indicated that this question had been asked at a recent Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting.  The issue was about whether it would be appropriate to hold elections and to make appointments for a short term of office, given the administrative time and resource implications involved.  There was a need to focus on the transition to the new unitary authorities and postponement of the 2026 election could help those preparations.  Elections in Cumbria had been deferred in 2021 prior to reorganisation and elections in Surrey had been postponed in 2025 in preparation for the shadow authority elections in 2026.  The situation had led to the spread of misinformation.  Local authorities in Lancashire could only request postponement from the Secretary of State.  Hyndburn Borough Council had been asked its opinion, but the Government would decide the matter.

 

9)      CCTV Camera, Baxenden

 

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

Submitted by Councillor David Heap on behalf of Lee Scholfield

 

“Please could the relevant portfolio holder give an update on the CCTV camera at the top of Southwood Drive, Baxenden?”

 

Councillor Whitehead reported that this was within the Portfolio of Councillor Clare Pritchard who was not present, but that she was able to provide a brief response on her behalf.  The issue was on-going.  The camera and wireless function needed to be replaced.  A bid had been submitted for the 2026/27 capital programme in order to repair and replace several CCTV cameras across the borough.  The Portfolio Holder would be asked to provide a reply and, if necessary, to meet with residents.

 

10)       Article 4 Direction

 

To the Leader of the Council (Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP)

Submitted by Councillor David Heap on behalf of Catherine Laycock

 

“Please could the Leader give an update as to when he thinks Baxenden will be covered by Article 4 protection with regards to HMOs.”

 

Councillor Dad reminded members that there had been a long debate about this matter at Council a few meetings ago.

 

The current Article 4 Direction relating to Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) had been made in March this year, but would not come into effect until March 2026.  When Cabinet had agreed to make this Direction, it had also resolved to review its impact six months after it had come into force - meaning that review would take place around Autumn 2026.

 

The National Planning Policy Framework required that Article 4 Directions were applied in a measured and targeted way, supported by robust evidence, and limited to the smallest area necessary to address the identified issue.

 

However, the authority was aware that several other councils across the North West had recently introduced Article 4 Directions that covered their entire administrative areas.  In light of this, officers would be reviewing the evidence to assess whether there was a case for extending similar protection to additional wards, including Baxenden.

 

This review would also consider whether any new Direction should be non-immediate, with a 12-month lead-in period, or immediate, which would take effect straight away but could expose the Council to compensation claims from affected property owners for abortive costs, loss of value, or reduced profits.

 

The Leader added that he would be happy to keep members apprised of any developments.

 

11)       War Memorials

 

To the Leader of the Council (Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP)

Submitted by Councillor Steven Smithson on behalf of Mr and Mrs Westell

 

“The War Memorial restoration programmes was allocated £55,000 at the budget - please can an update on the programme and which war memorials will be part of the programme be provided?”

 

There was a budget allocation of £55,000 in the Capital Programme for restoration of some of the war memorials.  Due to other work pressures within the Facilities Team, this project and associated funding had been slipped to 2026/27.  A further bid had been submitted for the 2026/27 capital programme in order to repair the remaining war memorials.  Should this be successful this would make one larger programme of works which should give cost savings in terms of economies of scale.

 

The full list of war memorials that had been allocated funding for repair would be made available as soon as possible.