Agenda and minutes

To receive any announcements from the Mayor and Chief Executive.

There were no announcements.

Group Business Managers to submit any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received on behalf of Councillors Ahmed, Arshad, Kahut, Marchington, Moore, Munro, O’Donovan, A U Pinnock, Robinson and Vickers.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 17 September 2025.

RESOLVED – That the Minutes of the Meeting of Council held on 17 September 2025 be approved as a correct record subject to the inclusion of the following wording in respect of minute 47:

“It was moved by Councillor Bolt and seconded by Councillor Arshad to suspend standing orders in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 47(1) to allow for public questions, which had been ruled out in advance of the meeting, to be put. Following advice from the Council Solicitor, the Mayor deemed that the matter not be put to the vote.”

Members will be asked to advise if there are any items on the Agenda in which they have a disclosable pecuniary interest, or any other interests, which may prevent them from participating in the discussion or vote on any of the items.

Cllrs Hussain, H Zaman and A Zaman declared an “other interest” in respect of Agenda item 22, Motion as to Proposed 20% VAT on Taxi and Private Hire Fares.

Cllrs H Zaman and A Zaman further declared an “other interest” in respect of Agenda item 21, Motion as to Disability Benefit Reforms.

To receive any Petitions from Members of the Council in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9.

No petitions were received.

Council will receive any petitions and/or deputations from members of the public. A deputation is where up to five people can attend the meeting and make a presentation on some particular issue of concern. A member of the public can also submit a petition at the meeting relating to a matter on which the body has powers and responsibilities.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10, Members of the Public must submit a deputation in writing, at least three clear working days in advance of the meeting and shall subsequently be notified if the deputation shall be heard. A maximum of four deputations shall be heard at any one meeting.

Council received a deputation from Alison Morgan regarding the use of glyphosate to control weeds

A response was provided by the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Transport and Housing (Cllr Crook)

Claire Walters submitted a petition regarding the use of glyphosate to control weeds.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9(3), the Mayor directed that the petition be referred to the relevant Executive Director.

To receive any public questions.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, the period for the asking and answering of public questions shall not exceed 15 minutes.

Any questions must be submitted in writing at least three clear working days in advance of the meeting.

Council received the following written questions in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11;

Question from Tracey Ibberson

“How does the council keep track of sites where asbestos has been a significant contaminant for decades?”

A response was provided by the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Transport and Housing - Cllr Crook.

Question from Tracey Ibberson

“Does Kirklees council have an asbestos register and if so, where can it be found?”

A response was provided by the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Transport and Housing - Cllr Crook.

Question from Rachel Batty

“Can the relevant Cabinet Member please outline the council’s process and responsibilities if asbestos dust from an unknown source (I.e. it has not come from the fabric of that building itself) is found within a property in the district?”

A response was provided by the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Transport and Housing- Cllr Crook.

Question from Rachel Batty

“Can the Council explain what procedures are in place for when a planning application proceeds, and subsequently some important historic information about contaminants on the site is discovered to have been omitted from the site history?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Regeneration  - Councillor Turner.

Question from Janine Gray

“If there are public rights of way through land, how can these be removed and what is the process?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Highways and Waste - Councillor Hawkins.

Question from Janine Gray

“What is the chance of getting public rights of way removed?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Highways and Waste – Councillor Hawkins.

Question from Karen McKenna

“How many RIDDOR reports have been received by the Council, in relation to any brownfield sites, in respect of accidental fibre release into the air?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Regeneration – Councillor Turner.

Question from Karen McKenna

“What is the Brick Street Regeneration Scheme, which it appears Kirklees have received £1,000,000 (one million pounds) from the West Yorkshire Combined Authority in 2021?

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Regeneration – Councillor Turner.

Question from Akooji Badat to

“Why is Kirklees proposing that in future, white cars will not be allowed for private hire use?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Communities and Environment – Councillor A U Pinnock.

Question from Alison Morgan

“Would the council commit to using alternatives to pesticides by using the Guide to Alternatives to Herbicides which plays out options, cost breakdowns and case studies?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Communities and Environment – Councillor A U Pinnock.

Question from Alison Morgan

“If the Council commits to using alternatives to pesticides, could the council make public their commitment to this step change?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Communities and Environment – Councillor A U Pinnock.

To receive the Minutes of the Meeting of West Yorkshire Combined Authority held on 24 July 2025.

The Minutes of West Yorkshire Combined Authority held on 24 July 2025 were received and noted.

To receive the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2024/2025.

Contact: Helen Kilroy, Governance

It was moved by Councillor Burke seconded by Councillor Cooper and

RESOLVED – That the Annual Report be noted.

To consider the re-appointment of the Council’s Independent Person.

Contact: David Stickley, Legal Services

It was moved by Councillor Armer, seconded by Councillor Firth and

RESOLVED – That Council approves the re-appointment of the existing Independent Person, Mike Stow, for a further two years.

To receive written questions to the Leader, Cabinet Members, Chairs of Committees and Nominated Spokespersons in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12.

A schedule of written questions will be published. One supplementary oral question will be permitted.

Council received the following written questions in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12;

Question from Councillor Greaves to the Cabinet Member for Housing and Communities – Councillor Crook

“How many households are currently in homeless accommodation, what is the total weekly cost for homeless accommodation and how much of this do ratepayers fund?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member.

Question from Councillor Greaves to the Cabinet Member for Education – Councillor Rylah

“Of the 3,400 children who receive free school transport only 55% travel by bus despite this being the cheapest, most effective and most environmentally and socially sound means of transport available. What are the essential reasons by category of need / support that result in provision of a taxi?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member.

Question from Councillor Greaves to the Cabinet Member for Finance and Regeneration – Councillor Turner

“After years of battling against the Labour Cabinet and trying to make them release the millions held by them in s106 monies to our schools, in May of this year senior officers from across the Council drafted a new policy that would finally enable that to happen. Why haven’t this Labour Cabinet approved that policy and removed the block on getting this money out to our schools?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member.

Question from Councillor Longstaff to the Leader of the Council – Councillor Pattison (Referred to Councillor Turner)

“We have just received a damming verdict from the high court relating to the lack of a section 106 agreement in a Dewsbury planning application.  What urgent steps have we put in place to stop anymore damming verdicts from the high court?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member.

Question from Councillor Longstaff to the Cabinet Member for Finance and Regeneration – Councillor Turner

“Now that Huddersfield Football Club now is in full control of the stadium where does that leave the Huddersfield Giants search for a new home?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member.

Question from Councillor Taylor to the Leader of the Council –

Councillor Pattison (Referred to Councillor Dad)

“Do you think Scrutiny is working at the moment?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member.

Question from Councillor Burke to the Cabinet Member for Finance and Regeneration – Councillor Turner

“Now that the Council has taken control of the former Gasworks site, will it actively support the Huddersfield Giants in their ambition to secure this location as their preferred long-term home?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member.

Question from Councillor Munro to the Cabinet Member for Finance and Regeneration – Councillor Turner

“Why won’t the Council release section 106 monies to make the road safety improvements that are desperately needed on Rowley Lane just below the school, as wagons are travelling up Rowley Lane using the pavement to get round the bend to continue up the hill, when this is the pedestrian walkway for school pupils and families walking to school?”

A  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

To receive the Minutes of (i) Cabinet held on 8 Juy and 9 September 2025 and Cabinet Committee – Local Issues held on 11 June and 23 July 2025.

Council received the Minutes of (i) Cabinet held on 8 July and 9 September 2025 and Cabinet Committee – Local Issues held on 11 June and 23 July 2025.

(i)             To receive an update from the Deputy Leader of the Council (Cabinet Member for Housing and Transport) – Councillor Crook

(ii)            To receive oral questions/comments to Cabinet Members on their Portfolios and relevant Cabinet Minutes;

-       The Leader of the Council (Councillor Pattison)

-       The Deputy Leader of the Council / Housing and Transport (Councillor Crook)

-       Adult Social Care and Corporate (Councillor Dad)

-       Children’s Services (Councillor Kendrick)

-       Communities and Environment (Councillor A U Pinnock)

-       Education (Councillor Rylah)

-       Finance and Regeneration (Councillor Turner)

-       Highways and Waste (Councillor Hawkins)

-       Public Health (Councillor Addy)

Council received a portfolio update from the Deputy Leader of the Council / Cabinet Member for Housing and Transport (Councillor Crook), prior to oral questions to the Leader and Cabinet Members in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 13.

(i)    Corporate Governance and Audit Committee

(ii)   District Wide Planning Committee

(iii)  Health and Wellbeing Board

(iii)  Licensing and Safety Committee

(iv)  Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee

(v)   Personnel Committee

(vi)  Strategic Planning Committee

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

-       Appeals Panel (Councillor Longstaff)

-       Corporate Governance and Audit Committee (Councillor Taylor)

-       District Wide Planning Committee (Councillor Ullah)

-       Health and Wellbeing Board (Councillor Addy)

-       Licensing and Safety Committee - including Licensing and Regulatory Panel (Councillor Firth)

-       Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee (Councillor Burke)

-       Personnel Committee (Councillor Pattison)

-       Scrutiny Panel – Children’s (Councillor Ali)

-       Scrutiny Panel – Environment and Climate Change (Councillor Cooper)

-       Scrutiny Panel – Growth and Regeneration (Councillor Amin)

-       Scrutiny Panel – Health and Adult Social Care (Councillor J D Lawson)

-       Standards Committee (Councillor Armer)

-       Strategic Planning Committee (Councillor Homewood)

-       Kirklees Active Leisure (Councillor Sokhal)

-       One Adoption Joint Committee (Councillor Sewell)

-       West Yorkshire Combined Authority (Councillor Pattison)

-       West Yorkshire Combined Authority Transport Committee (Councillor McLoughlin)

-       West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Authority (Councillor O’Donovan)

-       West Yorkshire Joint Services Committee (Councillor Munir Ahmed)

-       West Yorkshire Police and Crime Panel (Councillor Lowe)

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillors Scott, H Zaman, Masood Ahmed, Hussain, Moore, A Zaman and Anwar;

“This Council notes:

• The UK Government and the UN have both recognised that human rights due diligence is a core part of responsible business and public sector conduct.
• The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UN PRI) provide a framework for ethical sourcing and investment.
• Section 18 of the Procurement Act 2023 permits contracting authorities to consider a supplier’s track record and compliance with international standards, including human rights.
• Oxford, North Somerset, and other councils have taken steps to strengthen their procurement and investment policies to ensure public money is not used to support companies implicated in serious human rights violations.

This Council believes:

• Kirklees Council has a responsibility to ensure its financial decisions align with its stated values on equality, justice, and human rights.
• Taxpayers’ money should not be used to support companies that are complicit in or benefit from breaches of international law — including the occupation of Palestinian territories, apartheid, or other recognised violations.
• Ethical procurement and investment is not only a moral imperative, but also a legal and reputational risk management tool.

This Council therefore resolves to:

1. Review and strengthen the Council’s Investment and Procurement Strategies to ensure they:

-       Align with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;

-       Incorporate the UN Principles for Responsible Investment;

-       Make clear that the Council may exclude suppliers who are directly involved in or benefit from serious violations of international humanitarian law or human rights;

-       Remain compliant with the Procurement Act 2023 and all applicable UK legislation.

2. Request that the Cabinet bring forward an updated Ethical Procurement and Investment Policy for adoption, with clear criteria and governance arrangements for implementation and monitoring.

3. Mandate that all Council contracts and investments be reviewed against the updated policy, with a report brought to Cabinet within six months.
4. Affirm the Council’s commitment to transparency and ethical stewardship of public resources.”

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillor Alison Munro and Councillor Paola Davies

This Council notes:

1)    Violence against women and girls (VAWG) includes female homicide, rape, sexual assault, domestic abuse, stalking, harassment and controlling and coercive behaviour. Some of these are complex crimes which have a devasting and often life-changing impact on victims, their families and friends;

2)    Between 2018/19 to 2022/23, police records of VAWG in England and Wales rose by 37%. In West Yorkshire, domestic abuse related crimes make up 21% of all recorded crimes in region. However, this is the tip of the iceberg, as often abuse is never reported;

3)    It has been reported recently that approximately 2 million women a year in England and Wales are victims of male violence. It’s also estimated that at least 1 in 12 women are victims of violence perpetrated by men, which includes harassment, sexual assault and domestic violence;

4)    According to the Home Office, the national average cost to the UK of violence against women and girls is estimated to be in the region of £37 billion annually (including cost of health, legal and social services). In Kirklees, the Kirklees Joint Strategic Assessment (KJSA) has indicated that the estimated cost of domestic violence/abuse to agencies locally is in the region of £43 million each year;

5)    While victims of domestic abuse are not confined to a particular gender, the evidence shows that the majority of victims are women. Between November 2022 and November 2023, there were 59,681 total reported cases of domestic abuse across West Yorkshire, with 43,691 (73%) of the victims being female.

This Council believes that:

1)    Violence against women and girls is a significant issue on a local, regional and national level. It is a national emergency, and the scale of violence is akin to a public health crisis;

2)    There is a lot of good work being done at a local and regional level to tackle the issue of violence against women and girls and this Council commends the work already being done. For instance, Kirklees Council is a supporter of the White Ribbon campaign, which encourages men to challenge misogynistic behaviour. The Council also has a strategic focus on tackling VAWG through its Kirklees Communities Partnership Plan and focus on multi-agency collaboration and public safety initiatives. At a regional level, the West Yorkshire Combined Authority is also taking a strategic approach through its Safety of Women and Girls Strategy, which includes a commitment to embed healthy relationships education in schools and communities, behavioural change through intervention programmes, improving safety in public spaces and strengthening services for victims and survivors;

3)    While Kirklees Council is actively working to tackle VAWG, there is room to do more, especially in terms of leadership, visibility and long-term investment. The Council should publicly appoint an elected member VAWG Champion – to provide visible leadership, ensure accountability and champion the voices of survivors in policy-making. The Council should also improve public engagement, as there  ...  view the full agenda text for item 77.

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

To consider the following Motion in the names of: J C Lawson, P Davies, J D Lawson, Cooper, Scott and H Zaman

This Council notes:

1)    The statement by the former Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution, Jim McMahon MP, on the 24^th June 2025 which outlined the Government’s plan to introduce legislation which will ‘simplify governance arrangements’ for local authorities in England and abolish the committee system, requiring all councils to adopt the leader and cabinet system;

2)    Councils in the UK typically operate under one of three governance structures: leader and cabinet, committee or mayoral systems;

3)    Most councils currently operate under a leader and cabinet model. The committee system was the way that councils were governed up until 2000. The Local Government Act 2000 changed the models of governance, introducing the leader and executive (cabinet) and elected mayor and executive models. The Local Government Act 2000 also resulted in the abolition of the committee system in England everywhere (except shire authorities with a population under 85,000). However, as part of the Localism Act 2011, the committee system was re-introduced as an option for all local authorities to adopt;

4)    Typically, under the leader and cabinet model, the full council elects a leader, who then appoints a cabinet (executive), with cabinet members responsible for specific areas of service and the cabinet being the primary decision-making body. Under the committee system model, power is exercised, alongside full council, by a number of politically balanced committees, each with a specific area of responsibility. Under the executive mayor and cabinet model, a directly-elected mayor leads the executive and is accountable to the electorate;

5)    Currently, councils in England can change their governance arrangements and local residents can have a say on the governance model adopted by their local authority via a referendum;

6)    As part of the Government’s plans, councils currently using the committee model, including councils which have recently transitioned to the committee model following a referendum, will be required to transition to the leader and cabinet model;

7)    The Government has argued that the changes are needed in order to improve clarity and accountability in decision-making, enhance efficiency by streamlining governance structures and preventing unnecessary expenditure on governance transitions.

This Council believes that:

1)    Councils across the country use various governance systems, with some favouring the committee system and others preferring executive systems. Councils should have the choice to choose which model of governance best suits the needs of its residents. The details of councils’ internal arrangement should be a matter for local discretion. Although Kirklees Council currently operates a leader and cabinet model, it should be given the opportunity to transition to the committee system if Kirklees residents support this. Local people should be given the power to make the best choice for themselves;

2)    The Government’s plans are at odds with the devolved powers that the Labour party advocates. It should not be a one-size fits all approach. Fundamentally, the Government’s plans to  ...  view the full agenda text for item 78.

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

To consider the following Motion in the names of: Councillor Cahal Burke and Councillor John Lawson

This Council notes:

1)    Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) refers to young people who require extra help and support with their learning difficulty and/or a disability that means they need special health and education support;

2)    Private providers play a key role in the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities sector, including early years, alternative provision and specialised independent schools and are often commissioned by councils to provide support and education for children with SEND. In Kirklees, there are 10,098 pupils aged 4 to 16 years with SEND. Of these 9,407 pupils are educated in mainstream schools and settings and 691 in special schools (2022). SEND provision is a key issue for many parents in Kirklees.
Across England, approximately 1.7 million pupils have been identified as having special educational needs, representing around 19.6% of pupils;

3)    There has been a huge surge in the need for SEND provision and, as a result, demand for school places supporting SEND students across the UK. Many state schools are not adequately equipped to meet the increased demand or to support pupils with more complex and challenging needs. This has led to expert providers across the private and charitable school sectors stepping in;

4)    According to House of Commons Library research, commissioned by the Liberal Democrat national party, the top private equity companies providing SEND schooling have seen their annual profits increase as the SEND crisis has worsened, with some making margins of over 20%. Some of the private providers of special needs education are backed by private equity companies based in tax havens or foreign sovereign wealth funds;

5)    The SEND crisis has led to many councils facing exorbitant costs for private provision. This is at a time when local authority budgets are being pushed to the brink, with many facing effective bankruptcy or end service provision for vulnerable groups;

6)    The Liberal Democrat national party has demanded that private providers of special education are subject to an operating profit cap of 8% in order to curb exorbitant profits. The party has called for the Government to cap the profits of these companies to ensure that money is channelled back into the SEND system and not into the pockets of shareholders.

This Council, therefore, resolves to:

Instruct the Leader of the Council to write to the Education Secretary, Bridget Phillipson MP, to express concern that the profiteering from private equity firms is a major driver of the crisis in our SEND system and to cap the profits of these firms at 8%, ensuring that the priority is provision and not profits and helping to cut the excessive profiteering off the backs of disabled children. While the Government’s commitment to reform the SEND system is welcome, profit-limiting controls are needed as a matter of urgency.

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

To consider the following Motion in the names of: Councillor John Lawson and Councillor Andrew Marchington

This Council notes:

1)    The Government has published a Green Paper, which includes proposals to change disability and long-term sickness benefits. This includes Personal Independence Payment (PIP);

2)    PIP is claimed by nearly 3.7 million people in England and Wales, which includes residents in Kirklees. PIP is a benefit not linked to being in work or out of work but instead designed to help people with the additional unavoidable costs of having a disability. It is used by people who need daily help because of a long-term illness or disability or mental health condition. Many disabled people rely on PIP to cover the cost of getting to and from work, paying for essential equipment and for meeting their social care charges;

3)    PIP is a non-means tested benefit, meaning that claims are not affected by an individual’s income, capital or savings. It consists of 2 parts: a daily living component and a mobility component. Depending on their assessment, individuals may receive one or both components;

4)    The Government’s Green Paper proposes that PIP will be focused more on those with higher needs and reports suggest that eligibility criteria will be tightened. This may mean that individuals judged to have lower needs will no longer be eligible for the daily living component of PIP. In effect, it may mean that some individuals could lose entitlement to the daily living element of PIP and potentially other entitlements linked to this award. If an individual loses the daily living component, it will directly affect their caregiver, as the carer may become ineligible for Carer’s Allowance or the carer element within Universal Credit. Furthermore, the Government’s Spring Statement indicated that they wish to freeze the health element of Universal Credit for existing claimants until 2030 – meaning it will no longer increase with inflation, resulting in a real terms loss of income for over two million households;

5)    Responding to the Chancellor’s Spring Statement and the publication of the Government’s impact assessment for their planned cuts to disability benefits, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation state that the cuts to health-related benefits risk pushing 250,000 people into poverty, including 50,000 children;

6)    People who struggle to even wash their hair may have their payments reduced by an average of £1,720 per year. It is estimated that 370,000 people with disabilities will no longer qualify for PIP under the Government’s new assessment rules.

This Council believes that:

·       Some of these changes will have a negative impact on the lives of Kirklees residents;

·       These changes amount to nothing less than an attack on those living with disabilities and health conditions – who need PIP payments and health-related Universal Credit, to live independent, dignified lives;

·       Freezing, reducing and removing these payments will have a catastrophic impact on million of households who, due to disability and ill-health, face some of the highest rates of material deprivation in the UK.

This Council, therefore, resolves  ...  view the full agenda text for item 80.

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillors Scott, H Zaman, Masood Ahmed, Hussain, Moore, A Zaman and Anwar;

“This Council notes with serious concern:

That the Government has passed the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill, implementing parts of the earlier Pathways to Work Green Paper published in March 2025.

That the original Green Paper proposed wide-ranging reforms to PIP and long-term sickness benefits, including (i) stricter eligibility thresholds (such as the “4 points in one activity” test) (ii) reductions in support for people with mental health conditions and (iii) a shift toward linking disability benefits more closely with work and health treatment.

That while some of these proposals were dropped following public and parliamentary opposition (notably the new PIP scoring rule), others remain in force or are being implemented in stages, particularly those related to Universal Credit, the Work Capability Assessment, and health?related conditionality.

That the Government has confirmed existing PIP claimants will not be immediately affected, but that new claimants from late 2026 onwards may face stricter rules depending on further guidance and secondary legislation.

That changes to Universal Credit include plans to remove or reduce the “limited capability for work-related activity” element for new claimants, especially under-22s, potentially leaving thousands of vulnerable people with significantly less support.

This Council further notes:

That campaigners and expert organisations including Citizens Advice, Health Equity North, and the Resolution Foundation have warned of substantial financial losses and increased hardship under the reforms.

That research by Health Equity North estimates Huddersfield constituency alone could lose £17 million annually under the original package of proposals, with lasting consequences for residents, the local economy, and essential services.

That many of the worst-affected areas are in the North, with longstanding structural inequalities, poorer health outcomes, and stretched public services, including Kirklees.

That local councils like Kirklees are likely to face additional pressures on:
Adult social care, Housing and homelessness services, Welfare support, advice, and crisis payments, Mental health and public health provision, without any clear guarantees of increased funding or capacity.

This Council believes:

That the reforms represent a regressive shift in disability and sickness support, undermining the rights, dignity and independence of people with long-term conditions.

That there is insufficient evidence that the reforms will lead to improved outcomes for disabled people, and growing concern they may increase poverty, reduce access to support, and worsen health inequalities.

That Kirklees has a duty to speak out against national policies that will directly harm its most vulnerable residents and shift costs onto already overstretched local services.

This Council therefore resolves to:

(1)  Formally oppose the changes to Universal Credit and disability benefits as enacted under the Universal Credit and PIP Bill, and any future secondary legislation that restricts access to PIP, particularly for people with mental health conditions or fluctuating needs.

(2)  Write to the Prime Minister, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, and Chancellor of the Exchequer to (i) express the Council’s objection to the enacted reforms (ii) call  ...  view the full agenda text for item 81.

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillors Cllr Habiban Zaman, Cllr Adam Zaman, Cllr Masood Ahmed, Cllr Cathy Scott, Cllr Yusra Hussain, Cllr Ammar Anwar, Cllr Aziz Daji, Cllr Hanifa Darwan and Cllr Zahid Kahut

“This Council notes that:

(i)             Reports suggest the Government is considering imposing the standard 20% rate of VAT on all taxi and private hire vehicle (PHV) fares.

(ii)            HM Treasury’s own consultation on this issue (April 2024) acknowledged that such a measure could increase passenger costs by up to 20%, with the greatest impact on disabled people, older residents, families without access to a car, and communities with poor public transport links.

(iii)          The Institute of Chartered Accountants (July 2024) warned that applying VAT in this way would “disproportionately affect those who rely on these services in areas with poor public transport.”

(iv)          Transport for London, in its submission to HMRC (August 2024), raised serious concerns about affordability for passengers already struggling with the cost of living.

This Council believes that:

(i)             Taxis and private hire vehicles are not a luxury but a lifeline for many residents in Kirklees.

(ii)            This move would hit the lowest-paid hardest: shift workers, NHS staff, care workers, and those on zero-hours contracts who rely on taxis when buses and trains are not running. For them, taxis are the only way to reach work on time. A 20% price hike risks cutting off access to jobs and essential services, deepening inequality.

(iii)          Local taxi and private hire operators, already facing rising fuel, insurance and licence costs, would struggle to absorb this change, risking job losses and reduced availability of services.

This Council therefore resolves to:

(i)                      Formally oppose any government move to impose 20% VAT on taxi    

                and private hire fares.

(ii)                     Write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State  

                for Transport setting out this Council’s concerns about the

                disproportionate impact on vulnerable groups, low-paid workers,

                and the taxi/PHV industry.

(iii)                   Ask the Leader of the Council to raise this issue with the West

                Yorkshire Combined Authority and the Local Government

(iv)                   Publicly reaffirm this Council’s support for accessible, affordable and fair transport for all Kirklees residents.

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillors Scott, H Zaman, Masood Ahmed, Hussain, A Zaman and Anwar;

“This Council notes:

(i)             That the UK State Pension is already one of the lowest in Europe, with more than one in ten pensioners living in poverty.

(ii)            That from April 2026 the full new State Pension is expected to exceed the income tax threshold, meaning many pensioners could face paying tax simply for receiving their pension entitlement.

(iii)          That after decades of working and paying in, people deserve to retire with dignity, not be penalised with an additional tax burden on their basic pension.

This Council believes:

(i)             The State Pension should be tax-free.

(ii)            It is unjust to penalise pensioners by bringing their basic pension into the scope of income tax.

(iii)          Government should prioritise protecting pensioners from financial hardship, not push more into poverty.

This Council resolves to:

(i) Write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer urging Government to exempt the State Pension from income tax.

(ii) Support national campaigns and petitions that seek to protect the State Pension from taxation.

(iii) Call on the Government to raise the personal allowance in line with increases to the state pension and to take urgent steps to tackle pensioner poverty.

(iv)Circulate this resolution to all MPs representing constituencies across Kirklees, urging them to raise this matter in Parliament.”

Item not considered (Meeting terminated in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16:2).