Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any announcements from the Mayor and Chief Executive.

The Mayor conveyed congratulations to Councillor Robinson upon the recent birth of her son. The Mayor also conveyed the sympathies of Council to Councillor Bolt, following a recent bereavement.

The Mayor advised Council that a concert in aid of the Mayor’s Charity would be taking place on Friday 13 February 2026 at Batley Town Hall and that tickets were currently available.

Group Business Managers to submit any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received on behalf of Councillors Bolt, Bramwell, Brook, Daji, Davies, J D Lawson, Lowe, Kahut, Moore, O’Donovan, Robinson, Simpson, Vickers and A Zaman.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting of (i) Council held on 10 December 2025 and (ii) Extra Ordinary Council held on 17 December 2025.

RESOLVED – That the Minutes of the Meetings held on 10 December and 17 December 2025 be approved as a correct record.

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

Councillors Armer, E Firth, Kendrick, Longstaff, Pattison, A Pinnock, Sewell, Sokhal and Turner declared an ‘other’ interest in Agenda Item 12 on the grounds that they are in receipt of a concessionary bus pass.

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

Council received a petition from Councillor McCarthy which requested the replacement of the footbridge near Upper Mills, Slaithwaite that was recently destroyed in storms.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9(3) the Mayor directed that the subject matter of the petition be referred to the appropriate Executive Director for investigation.

The Committee 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 the following deputations;

(i)             Deputation from Tia Hamilton Pinnock on behalf of Huddersfield African Caribbean Cultural Trust.

A response was provided by the Leader of the Council (Councillor Pattison).

(ii)            Deputation from Helen Wilson on behalf of Dewsbury Cemetery Action Group.

A response was provided by the Leader of the Council (Councillor Pattison).

(iii)          Deputation from Dilys Beaumont on behalf of Better Buses Campaign West Yorkshire.

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Transport (Councillor Crook).

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 Heather Peacock

“Is Huddersfield bus station getting an upgrade in the next two years as it desperately needs one now?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Transport (Councillor Crook).

Question from Owyn Ibberson

“Regarding retaining walls around new developments, how does the Council factor the Highways Act, Section 167, when part of the proposed public highway in question, is actually owned by a third party resident, and no permissions have been sought?”

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

Question from Owyn Ibberson

“Kirklees has a large number of brownfield sites, that are available for redevelopment. What steps does the Council take, before the land is sold off, to ensure that it is actually safe for development eg..heavy metal testing, asbestos testing etc...and are these documents / results made public for transparency?”

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

Question from Tracey Ibberson

“What is the Council's intention for the increase in traffic in and around Cleckheaton with the substantial increase in housing development with regards to air quality and road safety?”

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

Question from Sarah Young

“If piling operations are carried out in close proximity to residential properties, how will risks related to vibration, noise, and potential disturbance to occupants be assessed and appropriately controlled, such as house surveys?”

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

Question from Sarah Young

“How does any proposed piling activity, when undertaken near residential properties, comply with relevant standards for vibration, noise control, and protection of nearby structures?”

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

Question from Sharon Taylor

“Given that Kirklees planning portal has multiple and various 'application' numbers, relating to the same development or plan, how transparent is this process, for concerned members of the public, to educate themselves around what is happening in their areas?”

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

Question from Sharon Taylor

“With regards to the Highways Act 1980, section 167, how does the Council proceed, with planning permissions already granted, when the developer changes plans, to include a retaining wall, which would contravene (a) within a highway boundary (b) be in close proximity to residential properties (c) is higher than 4.5 feet in height?”

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

Question from Karen McKenna

“When independent asbestos tests, from members of the public, within the area of a brownfield development site, are presented to the Council as being positive (higher than trace levels), and asbestos professionals state clearly, they are higher than  ...  view the full minutes text for item 137.

To receive the half yearly monitoring report on treasury management activities for 2025/2026.

Contact: James Anderson, Accountancy

RESOLVED – That the report be received and noted.

It was moved by Councillor Turner, seconded by Councillor Pattison and

RESOLVED – That the report be received and noted.

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

One supplementary oral question will be permitted.

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

Question from Councillor Bolt

“The second Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy, which ended in March 2025, included an objective that 50% of short journeys in towns and cities should be walked or cycled by 2030. Please can the Leader provide data for Active Travel journeys in Kirklees and in particular where the journeys are mentioned?”

A response was provided by the Cabinet Member for Public Health (Councillor Addy).

Question from Councillor Armer

“I was contacted by a Thurstonland resident on 8^th January who informed that Cold Hill/Halstead Lane had not been gritted, and the road was in a dangerous condition. On making enquiries I was informed that the local contractor had declined to grit the route because overhanging tree limbs were causing damage to his vehicle. I have since been told that these trees are rooted in private property adjacent to the highway. What powers does this council have to require that vegetation on private land does not cause obstruction to free passage on the highway?”

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

Question from Councillor Armer

“In the calendar year 2025, on how many occasions did this council request/require property owners to address problems related to vegetation obstructing or encroaching a highway?”

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

Question from Councillor J D Lawson

“Pavement parking unfortunately is wide spread not only within Crosland Moor and Netherton Ward but Kirklees as a whole. This inconsiderate parking has a detrimental effect on pedestrians, on the disabled and sight impaired, those using mobility scooters and those pushing prams and buggies causing them to have to walk on often very busy roads all because a car or other vehicle driver thought it acceptable to park on the pavement and therefore blocking access.

In light of the government proposal to give power to local councils regarding pavement parking can the cabinet lead update on what action the council will take to ensure that Kirklees is ready to start using these powers and able to enforce them over large parts of Kirklees?”

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

Question from Councillor H Zaman

“At Cabinet on 21 October, the Leader said burial land is “specialised” because of groundwater, flooding and soil constraints, and therefore can’t be compared with land being considered for a new leisure facility in Dewsbury.

Can the Cabinet Member confirm what technical criteria the Council uses to assess burial land, how many sites in North Kirklees have been assessed since the burial land motion was passed in February, and how many were ruled out on environmental grounds rather than availability or ownership?”

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

Question from Councillor Scott

“Will the Leader confirm whether options to deal with burial  ...  view the full minutes text for item 139.

The Elected Mayor (West Yorkshire Combined Authority) will be present for the Council’s Key Discussion Debate, which will include an update on the Elected Mayor’s current priorities.

The Elected Mayor of West Yorkshire was in attendance for the key discussion and provided an overview of her priorities, prior to a question and answer session.

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillors Burke and J C 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.”

RESOLVED – Motion approved.

It was moved by Councillor Burke and seconded by Councillor J C Lawson that;

“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.”

RESOLVED – That the Motion be approved.

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillors J C Lawson and A C Pinnock;

“This Council notes:

1)    The English National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS) is a government-backed initiative that offers free local bus travel in England for people over the State Pension age and people with eligible disabilities. However, the scheme is typically only available to individuals with disabilities outside of peak hours, from 9.30am to 11pm on weekdays, and all day on weekends and bank holidays;

2)    Local areas can offer discretionary concessions beyond the rules set by the ENCTS, including extending free bus travel on weekdays before 9.30am. Locally, the ENCTS scheme is administered by the West Yorkshire Combined Authority, but Kirklees and West Yorkshire currently does not offer free travel before 9.30am on weekdays for most disabled bus pass holders;

3)    The Kirklees Transport Strategy (2025) commits to improving accessibility and promoting inclusive, sustainable transport options for all residents;

4)    Disabled bus pass holders make up about 10% of all concessionary users in England;

5)    The Bus Services Act became law in October 2025 and aims to improve the performance, accessibility and quality of bus services across the country. Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for Harrogate and Knaresborough, Tom Gordon, submitted an amendment to the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill when it was debated in Parliament, and called on the Government to remove the 23:00-09:30 exception to free travel for disabled people. The amendment received support from over 75 MPs, disability charities and campaign groups, but was voted down.

This Council believes that:

1)    These restrictions disproportionately affect disabled people who need to travel early for work, education, healthcare or caring responsibilities. Disabled people should have the freedom to travel at any time of day, just as non-disabled people do;

2)    Time restrictions on concessionary travel create a postcode lottery and undermine efforts to promote equality, independence, and inclusion;

3)    Removing these restrictions would support disabled residents in accessing employment, education, healthcare, and social opportunities.

This Council, therefore, resolves to:

1)    Request that the Leader of the Council write to the Secretary of State for Transport to express disappointment at the Government’s decision to turn their backs on disabled people as part of the Commons vote last year, as it undermines their commitment to accessibility and equality. The Government needs to rethink their decision and remove the discriminatory restrictions to help create a system that allows everyone to make the journeys they want to. Removing the time restrictions could also open up work and training opportunities for disabled people, allowing them to travel with freedom, ease and confidence.
 

2)    Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Elected Mayor of West Yorkshire, to ask the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to extend the local ENCTS scheme to allow 24/7 free bus travel for all eligible disabled passholders across the region.”

RESOLVED – Motion approved.

It was moved by Councillor J C Lawson and seconded by Councillor A C Pinnock that;

“This Council notes:

1)    The English National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS) is a government-backed initiative that offers free local bus travel in England for people over the State Pension age and people with eligible disabilities. However, the scheme is typically only available to individuals with disabilities outside of peak hours, from 9.30am to 11pm on weekdays, and all day on weekends and bank holidays;

2)    Local areas can offer discretionary concessions beyond the rules set by the ENCTS, including extending free bus travel on weekdays before 9.30am. Locally, the ENCTS scheme is administered by the West Yorkshire Combined Authority, but Kirklees and West Yorkshire currently does not offer free travel before 9.30am on weekdays for most disabled bus pass holders;

3)    The Kirklees Transport Strategy (2025) commits to improving accessibility and promoting inclusive, sustainable transport options for all residents;

4)    Disabled bus pass holders make up about 10% of all concessionary users in England;

5)    The Bus Services Act became law in October 2025 and aims to improve the performance, accessibility and quality of bus services across the country. Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for Harrogate and Knaresborough, Tom Gordon, submitted an amendment to the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill when it was debated in Parliament, and called on the Government to remove the 23:00-09:30 exception to free travel for disabled people. The amendment received support from over 75 MPs, disability charities and campaign groups, but was voted down.

This Council believes that:

1)    These restrictions disproportionately affect disabled people who need to travel early for work, education, healthcare or caring responsibilities. Disabled people should have the freedom to travel at any time of day, just as non-disabled people do;

2)    Time restrictions on concessionary travel create a postcode lottery and undermine efforts to promote equality, independence, and inclusion;

3)    Removing these restrictions would support disabled residents in accessing employment, education, healthcare, and social opportunities.

This Council, therefore, resolves to:

1)    Request that the Leader of the Council write to the Secretary of State for Transport to express disappointment at the Government’s decision to turn their backs on disabled people as part of the Commons vote last year, as it undermines their commitment to accessibility and equality. The Government needs to rethink their decision and remove the discriminatory restrictions to help create a system that allows everyone to make the journeys they want to. Removing the time restrictions could also open up work and training opportunities for disabled people, allowing them to travel with freedom, ease and confidence.
 

2)    Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Elected Mayor of West Yorkshire, to ask the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to extend the local ENCTS scheme to allow 24/7 free bus travel for all eligible disabled passholders across the region.”

RESOLVED – That the Motion be approved.

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

“This Council notes that:

Motor neurone disease (MND) is one of the most devastating and unforgiving conditions imaginable. It advances with a cruel and relentless pace, leaving families little time to adjust to the profound changes it brings. A third of those diagnosed will die within a year; half within two. For those living with MND, every day truly matters.

In such circumstances, a safe and accessible home becomes far more than bricks and mortar: it becomes security, independence, dignity and comfort at a time when these are most fragile. Yet the swiftness with which MND progresses means that home adaptations must be provided not merely promptly, but with genuine urgency.

At present, Kirklees Council does not publish a fast-track process with defined, shortened statutory timescales for Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) applications. While it is acknowledged that urgent cases are prioritised through the Council’s triage system, this informal approach, however well-intentioned, does not offer the clarity, consistency or speed required by those whose needs can change dramatically in a matter of weeks.

The Motor Neurone Disease Association, in its report A Lifeline Not a Luxury, highlights examples of best practice across the country and recommends the creation of formal fast-track pathways for people with progressive and terminal illnesses. These systems ensure that vital adaptations are delivered swiftly, sparing families avoidable distress and preventing crises that carry greater emotional and financial costs.

This Council believes:

That every resident facing a progressive or terminal condition deserves a timely, compassionate and clearly defined route to the support they urgently require.

That early and decisive intervention preserves dignity, reduces avoidable hospital admissions, and protects individuals from becoming trapped in homes no longer suited to their rapidly changing needs.

And that Kirklees should adopt a standard worthy of its values—transparent, humane and fit for the realities of MND.

This Council therefore resolves:

To request that the matter be referred to the Council’s Scrutiny process and that the relevant Scrutiny Panel be requested to review the implementation of (i) to (iv) below;

(i)    To publish the Council’s fast-track process for the assessment, approval and delivery of Disabled Facilities Grant home adaptations for residents living with progressive or terminal conditions, including MND.

(ii)   To request that any necessary works and adaptions to support residents are carried out within a reasonable timeframe and as soon as is practically possible.

(iii)  To ensure that the fast-track process is transparent and accessible to residents, families and professionals, with clear guidance published on the Council’s website

(iv)To request that the Council works in close partnership with local health, social care, and care providers and patient representative organisations to ensure the Council collectively prioritises and responds to urgent health, housing and care needs arising for any residents experiencing any rapidly progressing life-limiting condition, including MND.

In adopting this motion, we affirm that in Kirklees, compassion is not optional,  ...  view the full agenda text for item 143.

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

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

“This Council notes:

1)    That His Majesty’s Government is advancing proposals which may result in the introduction of a national digital identity system, thereby fundamentally altering the manner in which individuals interact with public services and the state.

2)    That national digital identity schemes give rise to serious concerns in respect of civil liberties, including the expansion of data collection, increased monitoring, and the potential for state or corporate surveillance.

3)    That there are well-documented risks relating to data security, breaches of privacy, and the prospect of “mission creep” once such systems are established.

4)    That there is no clear or compelling evidence that a national digital identity system would deliver benefits that are either necessary or proportionate for local communities, whilst the risks of exclusion and discrimination—particularly affecting residents without access to digital devices, reliable connectivity, or adequate digital literacy—are substantial.

5)    That previous attempts to introduce national identity cards in the United Kingdom were abandoned due to widespread concerns regarding cost, intrusiveness, and incompatibility with democratic principles.

This Council believes:

1)    That the right to live freely, without undue monitoring or surveillance by the state or private corporations, is a fundamental pillar of a democratic society.

2)    That national digital identity systems risk undermining public confidence, creating additional barriers for vulnerable residents, and normalising an excessive reliance on personal data.

3)    That access to essential public services should not be contingent upon the possession or use of digital identification.

4)    That local authorities have a duty to protect the privacy, dignity, and fundamental freedoms of the communities they serve.

This Council resolves:

1)    To request that the Leader of the Council, on behalf of Council, write to the Secretary of State for the Home Department (i) expressing this Council’s firm opposition to the introduction of any national digital identity scheme whether mandatory or voluntary (ii) setting out this Council’s opposition to national digital identity proposals and (iii) calling for such proposals to be withdrawn.

2)    To request that the Leader of the Council or the Chief Executive write to the Local Government Association (LGA), urging it to oppose the development, trial, or implementation of any national digital identity system that may erode civil liberties or exclude residents.

3)    To reaffirm this Council’s commitment to safeguarding residents’ privacy, autonomy, and access to public services without the requirement for digital identification.”

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

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillors A Smith and Burke;

“This Council notes:

1)    In the 2021 Census, Kirklees was home to 8,942 people who reported that they had previously served in the regular UK Armed Forces;

2)    The obligations it owes to the armed forces community within Kirklees, as enshrined in the Armed Forces Covenant; that the armed forces community should not face disadvantage in the provision of services;

3)    That a number of military compensation schemes exist to recognise and compensate service personnel and their families, for the hardship, inconvenience or ongoing impact conditions, such as PTSD, limb or hearing loss;

4)    Whilst some benefits, such as Universal Credit, rightly disregard military compensation as income, others administered by or subject to the discretion of local authorities do not always do so. This means that some veterans must give up part of their compensation in order to access essential support. A 2022 Freedom of Information request by the Royal British Legion showed that nationally, only one in five (19%) of local authorities rightly disregarded all military compensation when assessing local benefit claims for Housing Benefit, Council Tax Support, Discretionary Housing Payments and Disabled Facilities Grants. In Kirklees, Discretionary Housing Payments are currently not disregarded; The Kirklees Armed Forces Covenant focuses on general support, housing, healthcare and integration, rather than explicitly referencing military compensation or its treatment in welfare means tests;

5)    There are over 1 million veterans nationally over the State Pension age with 146,000 estimated to be eligible for Pension Credit. However, current rules may deny them support if their military compensation is counted as income;

6)    Under the Armed Forces Covenant principles and statutory duty (Armed Forces Act 2021), councils must have due regard to these principles in housing, healthcare and education decisions. However, welfare benefit means tests are not covered by the legal duty and currently remain discretionary;

7)    The Royal British Legion ‘Credit their Service’ campaign exists to address the issue in the previous point, demanding an end to the treatment of military compensation as income by welfare benefit means test, as it results in many veterans and their families missing out on thousands of pounds each year. The Royal British Legion argue that it breaches the Armed Forces Covenant principle that veterans should face no disadvantage compared to civilians;

This Council believes that:

1)    No member of the armed forces community should be forced to give up their military compensation to access the same welfare support as their civilian counterparts;

2)    All compensation paid under any of the relevant military compensation schemes should be treated as such and not regarded as income when the local authority assesses applications for benefits over which they exercise discretion: Council Tax Support scheme, Housing Benefit, Discretionary Housing Payments and Disabled Facilities Grants. Rather it should be treated as intended, as a compensatory payment made in recognition of the often significant and life-changing service or sacrifice an individual has made in the course of their  ...  view the full agenda text for item 145.

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

To consider the following Motion in the names of Councillors Munro and J C Lawson:

“This Council notes:

1)    Pubs are a vital part of our communities, providing social spaces, supporting local jobs and contributing to the local economy;

2)    Rising costs, including energy bills, supply chain pressures and tax, have placed many pubs under severe financial strain. In addition to rising operational costs and challenges, pubs are also contending with changing social habits. Many pub owners and campaign groups have also been vocal about the scaling back of the Retail, Hospitality and Leisure (RHL) relief and the business rates rises announced in the Autumn Budget last year and warned about huge rate hikes and pub closures;

3)    The number of pubs closing their doors permanently has hit more than one a day for the first time according to government statistics, continuing and accelerating a long-term downward trend;

4)    Local pubs across Kirklees and across the country face closure without urgent and significant government intervention.

This Council believes:

1)    That a cut in VAT (Value Added Tax) for hospitality businesses would provide immediate relief for pubs;

2)    That additional targeted support, such as energy cost assistance, is essential to ensure that pubs can survive.

This Council resolves:

1)    To call on the Government to implement an emergency 5% VAT cut for hospitality businesses, which includes pubs, to ease financial pressures and help stimulate growth;

2)    To urge the Government to provide additional targeted support for pubs, including additional measures to address rising energy costs. The Government has recently hinted that they will make changes to how pubs’ business rates is calculated, which may result in smaller rises to bills. While this is welcome, the Government must intervene and announce additional support to permanently lower bills and end uncertainty;

3)    To request the Leader of the Council to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, setting out Kirklees Council’s support for these measures;

4)    To work with local pub owners, community groups and trade bodies, to highlight the importance of pubs to Kirklees and our communities and to promote initiatives that sustain their future.”

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