Page 1 of 1

Pendle's Administration

Posted: 13 Jun 2014, 05:56
by David Whipp
Last night's annual meeting of Pendle Council agreed to continue with a shared administration between Tories and Liberals. Labour put a half hearted challenge, with their group leader being put forward for Leader of the council.

I was one of our group's negotiating team. The thrust of the Labour group's pitch was about getting more county resources into Pendle (this is a requirement of the agreement between our groups at county hall), whereas discussions with the Tories centred more on meeting the challenges facing Pendle on a broader front.

This is the press statement:

Conservative and Liberal Democrat Councillors on Pendle Borough Council have reached an agreement which will see the two parties share control of the Council’s executive portfolios for the next twelve months.

Both groups will take a number of places on the shared executive proportional to their seats on the Council. This will equate to six Conservative and four Liberal Democrat portfolio holders.

Councillor Joe Cooney will continue as Leader of the Council, and new Liberal Democrat Leader Councillor Tony Greaves will be the Deputy Leader.

The two groups have issued a twelve point plan for the next twelve months, but have not signed a coalition agreement. Whilst the two Leaders have committed to working to find agreed approaches on each issue that arises during the year for the benefit of continuity in the Borough, both have retained the right to promote their distinctive policies and seek support elsewhere in the Council on those occasions where this is not possible.

Pendle Council has been in and out of no overall control since its formation, and no party has ever had control for more than four years. It has been in its current period of no overall control since 2008.

The twelve point plan for Pendle is:

Regeneration and Infrastructure investment: A renewed campaign to attract public and private investment into Pendle from county, regional, national and international sources.
Continuation of the Gearing up for Growth programme to support the local economy with greater openness in the systems for the distribution of resources.
Clean streets, tidy neighbourhoods. A new attack on litter, dirty streets and dumping of rubbish by means of an integrated cleansing and collection service, and full use of powers under the new Anti-Social Behaviour Act.
Dogs. An immediate review of Council powers, resources and local rules with a view to action against dog nuisances being a top priority.
Work with social housing providers to increase the supply of social housing, including PEARL-delivered schemes.
Promoting the Pendle accreditation scheme for private landlords, together with a new initiative to create Selective Licensing areas in appropriate parts of the urban areas, alongside continuing efforts to further reduce the number of empty properties in Pendle.
A full canvass and investigation into all postal votes in Pendle to identify and remove any irregularities.
An Executive-led review into the Parks and Recreation service including the relationship to area committees.
Continued support for police community support officers in Pendle but a review of what they do – and strong opposition to any proposals from the Lancashire Police Commissioner and Chief Constable to significantly cut or abolish neighbourhood policing in Pendle.
10. A commitment to equity in the distribution of resources amongst the different townships and communities of Pendle, and in the representation within the Council of members of the different political groups.

11. A serious look at the efficiency, accountability and effectiveness of Council structures, including consideration of reverting to a committee system, the review of area committee powers, and a review of working groups across the Council.

12. More openness and accountability in the process of Council restructuring, budget and staffing reductions, and transfer of services and facilities to town and parish councils and residents’ groups – all within the basic aim of maintaining services where possible.

Editors’ notes:

Pendle Borough Council is in no overall control. The current seats held by each party are as follows: Conservative 19, Labour 18, Liberal Democrat 10 and BNP 1 – plus one vacancy.

There will be 10 members of the new Executive and the parties will hold the following portfolios:


Councillor Joe Cooney: Housing Regeneration

Councillor Paul White: Enterprise, Growth and Promotion

Councillor Tommy Cooney: Finance and Corporate Services

Councillor James Starkie: Partnership Services

Councillor Graham Waugh: Planning and Development

Councillor Jennifer Purcell: Communities and Public Health

Liberal Democrats:

Councillor Tony Greaves: Economic Regeneration

Councillor David Clegg: Environmental Services

Councillor Nadeem Ahmed: Parks and Recreation

Councillor David Whipp: Special Projects, Engineers and Community Safety

Re: Pendle's Administration

Posted: 13 Jun 2014, 07:02
by Stanley
I noted with pleasure in the BET this morning that BTC is to take over management of the Civic Centre, the Liberal Club originally. (After they moved out of the old Brick School in Fountain Street)

Re: Pendle's Administration

Posted: 04 Jan 2015, 09:38
by plaques
I believe that neither Barlick or Colne swimming pools had a single customer over the two weeks Christmas - New year breaks. Not a good way to start new year resolutions.

Re: Pendle's Administration

Posted: 04 Jan 2015, 09:54
by David Whipp
All groups on the council voted for a two week closure at Colne and Barlick pools over Christmas a couple of years ago; I think the saving was about £18,000.

Last year, one group proposed closing the Colne pool between October and March to save £70,000. This wasn't accepted by a majority on the council.

Re: Pendle's Administration

Posted: 04 Jan 2015, 13:22
by plaques
Well that accounts for the attendance figures. I suppose the best time to close a leisure pool is when everybody is on holiday. Good joined up thinking. More austerity saving for ordinary people to digest. Of course if you are a member of a private club closing a public amenity makes very little difference. The amount saved maybe possible for a complete closure where the staff can enjoy their zero hours contract but for two weeks with the heating still on and some statuary closure days in between still doesn't make sense.