Decisions

The Cabinet Member for Culture, Economy and Skills presented a report which sought approval to appoint a contractor for work to the Bury Art Museum roof. This had been deferred from the previous meeting in order to clarify a point regarding the named contractor. Councillor McGill confirmed the crux of the matter was a mistake over two similar trading names, and gave assurances around the enhanced due diligence that had been undertaken. In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that Constellia, the external procurement agency, had issued a letter of apology and the Council retained confidence in using their services for future projects.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Noted the receipt of £589,545 restricted grant funding from the Arts Council, and £65,505 match funding from Bury Council, together totalling £655,050.04, which is specifically allocated for essential and urgent repairs of the roof at Bury Arts Museum (“Building Works”);

2.    Noted that Bury Council as part of the funding conditions has entered a Deed of Covenant with the Arts Council dated 15th December 2025, this places a 15-year restriction over the freehold of Bury Arts Museum. This is in accordance with an earlier Cabinet approval (September 2024);

3.    Noted that the Council has committed an additional £247,833.59 towards the cost of the Building Works;

4.    Noted the procurement process that has been undertaken by the Council to identify a contractor to undertake the Building Works;

5.    Approved the appointment of Craftsman Restoration Ltd (07339652) trading as UK Restoration Services as the contractor (“Contractor”) to undertake the Building Works, with a total estimated contract value of up to £888,801.63 (“Fee”); and

6.    Noted that in line with the recommendation of the project panel, the form of contract with the Contractor, will be JCT Intermediate Building Contract with Contractor's Design 2024 Edition including amendments.

Reasons for the decision:

·       Approval to appoint the Contractor is sought so that the urgent Building Works required to the BAM roof can commence. The Contactor has been selected by the project panel as the most qualified/experienced to carry out the work on a Grade II Listed building, and with the most competitive quote of the tenders.

·       As part of the procurement process, additional due diligence was undertaken to assess both the contractor’s capacity and capability to deliver the contract. This included a review of financial standing, project references, workforce arrangements and delivery model. The Council is therefore satisfied that the contractor possesses the necessary experience, technical expertise, operational capacity and supply chain arrangements to successfully undertake the works. Ongoing performance and financial monitoring will be maintained throughout the contract to provide continued assurance during delivery.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

The Council has a statutory duty to protect Grade II listed buildings under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. If the urgent repairs to the BAM roof are not carried out, the water ingress will continue, and the condition of the building will deteriorate further. There are no alternative options, as the BAM roof needs urgent repairs and the Arts Council have awarded a grant to enable this work to be carried out. If the grant is not drawn down, the work cannot continue. Do nothing is not an option as the building requires urgent work to the roof and protects the Cultural estate.

The Cabinet Member for Culture, Economy and Skills presented a report regarding the extension of the Local Growth and Place Flexible Grant (LGPFG) programme 2025/26 and the new year of funding, now called Economic Development & Regeneration Grant Funding 2026/27. Members welcomed the paper and the contributions to cultural projects.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Noted the update and the allocations for the Economic Development & Regeneration Grant Funding for 2025/26;

2.    Approved the proposals submitted to GMCA as listed below for Economic Development & Regeneration Grant Funding 2026/27;

3.    Delegated powers to Executive Director of Place in conjunction with Portfolio holders and the Director of Finance to make changes to the programme as issues arise through the year; and

4.    Noted the special requirements of the grant and vesting arrangements for EDRGF funding pertaining to the Casewell’s and Midlands Events LTD.

Reasons for the decision:

N/A

Alternative options considered and rejected:

N/A

The Deputy Leader and Interim Cabinet Member for Children and Young People presented a report regarding the short-term extension and recommission of Bury’s Alternative Provision for children and young people. In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that the cost of extending the contract did not exceed a pro-rata measurement of the overall contract cost, but did allow additional time and flexibility to plan moving forwards.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Approved the recommissioning of Bury’s Alternative Provision offer, in line with the Alternative Provision Strategy;

2.    Approved a structured programme of pre-market and stakeholder engagement including children, young people and families;

3.    Approved the short-term extension of existing contractual arrangements to 31st March 2027 via a blanket call-off order to the current providers, to ensure continuity of service;

4.    Approved the substantive procurement of a four-year Alternative Provision framework, with the route, two-stage Competitive Flexible Procedure or open tender, to be confirmed by the outputs of pre-market engagement; and

5.    Noted that a further Cabinet report will be brought forward outlining the final delivery model, financial implications and contract award recommendations.

Reasons for the decision:

Cabinet approval of these recommendations will deliver several significant and interrelated benefits, for children and young people, families, education providers, and the Local Authority, as outlined in the report.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

·       Maintain current model – rejected as it does not address gaps, rising costs, or poor outcomes.

·       Redesign without engagement – rejected owing to a substantial risk of failure due to lack of market insight.

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth presented a report regarding proposed works packages included within the JCT Design and Build Contract (2016) encompassing the delivery of a full land remediation strategy and associated preparatory enabling works at Pyramid Park, a 7.4-acre disused brownfield site identified for a high-quality, sustainable residential development.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Authorised the council to appoint and enter into a Schedule of amendments to JCT Design and Build Contract (2016) with Conlon Construction Limited (company number 00708997) as the main contractor to deliver the Pyramid Park Remediation Main Works to unlock the site for residential development, up to a total contract value of £1,554,000.00 including contingency, and term of 90 days;

2.    Accepted the recommendation that Conlon Construction Limited undertake the Pyramid Park Remediation Main Works as per the estimated contract value set out in this report, subject to the agreement of any outstanding contract amendments and clarifications; and

3.    Delegated acceptance of the final contract sum up to a total contract value of £1,554,000.00, including contingency, to the Director of Law and Democratic Services in consultation with the Executive Director of Place and Executive Director of Finance, and the council Leader and Cabinet Member for Strategic Growth.

Reasons for the decision:

Approval for the Council to appoint and enter into contract with Conlon to undertake the remediation and associated main works is required in order for the Pyramid Park scheme to progress to the construction works phase, thus enabling the full defrayment of the BLRF2 grant monies, and which upon completion of the remediation works, will unlock this key opportunity site for comprehensive future residential redevelopment.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

·       Re-run the procurement process for a new main works contractor with a view to securing a lower contract sum - Starting the procurement process again through the same (NWCH), or an alternative PCR compliant framework, would result in significantly delaying the start-on-site date for the remediation works, by several months. Due to the unique nature of the remediation works, it is highly likely that re-running the procurement process would not result in a lower contract value or realise cost savings for the council. Further scheme prolongation, at this point in time, would expose the council to build cost inflation which continues to rise.

·       Do nothing and / or return the BLRF2 grant to OPE - By failing to appoint the prospective contractor to remediate the site and thus, defray the outstanding BLRF2 grant monies, in line with the agreed GFA delivery milestones, it would severely affect the long-term viability of the site for realising future residential development and the positive outcomes and improvements associated with it. This is due to the large abnormal costs and complex technical work required to bring the site forward for development, that only the allocated BLRF2 grant could feasibly support.

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth presented a report regarding the approval for £153,009.00 additional capital funding for extra works to fully deliver the first phase of the Prestwich Village Regeneration project. Councillor Morris advised that the requirement for additional funding was identified as a late requirement through the statutory planning consultation. In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that this included ICT equipment costs which needed to wait until the end of the construction contract in order to be in-line with the car park operator. It was noted there were no risks of other costs rising anticipated.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Approved the additional capital funding requirement of £153,009.00 to ensure the full and successful delivery of Phase 1A (Travel Hub);

2.    Approved the use of the Council’s Capital Programme and Medium-Term Financial Strategy to fund the above additional costs using part of the approved funding for Phase 1A that was in place prior to the CRSTS grant being offered;

3.    Subject to legal approval of the terms under which it is provided, formally accepted the £14m CRSTS grant funding from Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) via the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA);

4.    Acknowledged that, subject to the funding requirement outlined in the recommendation at Section 2.1, the allocation of £14m from the Council's Capital Programme to the Prestwich Travel Hub is no longer required, following the acquisition of £14m from the CRSTS programme to cover this expenditure; and

5.    Delegated to the Director of Place, in consultation with the Monitoring Officer and Section 151 Officer, authority to take all steps necessary to implement this decision, including finalisation of any arrangements, and provision of any Council JV LLP member consents.

Reasons for the decision:

To successfully complete the delivery of Phase 1A (Travel Hub) within the agreed programme timeline and to meet the planning pre-commencement conditions and delivery of additional works identified since the approval for the £14m cost envelope in July 2024 that cannot currently be met by contingency. A formal acceptance of the £14m CRSTS funding is required by Bury Council to enable the grant funding to be claimed.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

·       Not carry out the works associated with the planning pre-commencement condition, including Building Control requirements - this would prevent the Council from opening the Travel Hub.

·       Not carry out the works associated with the parking control equipment - this would prevent the Council from opening the Travel Hub.

The Cabinet Member for Adult Care, Health and Public Service Reform presented a report providing a position update to Bury’s independent advocacy services and sought approval for a 3-month extension to the current contract and permission to retender. In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that the extension had an above inflation increase, reflecting wage inflation, but still offered value for money as the provider was tested and reliable. With regards to the financial commitment from the ICB, this was a statutory duty so was assured.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Approved a tactical extension to current contractual arrangements for a further 3 months to a new expiry date of 31 March 2027.

2.    Approved the authorisation to commence a tender process for an independent advocacy service, awarding a 4-year contract with the option to extend for a further 12 months, commencing on 1 April 2027.

3.    Approved a delegation of contract award, following engagement, service development and tender evaluation, to the Director of Adult Social Services, with ongoing monitoring and delivery of outcomes.

4.    Noted that the new advocacy contract will be funded from the adult social care community care budget.

Reasons for the decision:

The recommendations align with the Procurement Act 2023. It is also a legal requirement for local authorities to provide an independent advocacy service that includes; Independent Mental Capacity Advocacy (IMCA), Independent Mental Health Advocacy (IMHA), Care Act Advocacy and Independent Complaints Advocacy.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

·       Contract expires and no re-tender – rejected as statutory duties would not be fulfilled.

·       Contract not extended and re-tendered for 1 January 2027 – rejected owing to the impact of legislative changes in relation to DoLS ruling on 2 June 26 not being fully clarified, CYP commissioners’ scoping work for an all-age contract not being complete, GM ICB decision to jointly commission a service not known in time, and launching a new service on 1st January that involves transferring support would be unnecessarily challenging over Christmas break.

The Deputy Leader and Interim Cabinet Member for Children and Young People presented a report regarding the outcome of the monitoring inspection undertaken in March 2026 by Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission (CQC), which had concluded that effective action has been taken in all six priority action areas. Members congratulated all involved in getting Bury to this point. In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that neurodiverse diagnoses sat at a GM level and could be discussed in full at the Health Scrutiny meeting next week.

Decision:

Cabinet noted the outcome of the monitoring inspection and the plans for continued transformation through the local SEND Reform Plan.

Reasons for the decision:

To formally note the outcome.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

N/A

The Cabinet Member for Adult Care, Health and Public Service Reform presented a report regarding the results of first CQC assessment of Bury Local Authority and summarised the key strengths and areas where improvement was required. Councillor Tariq advised that the overall assessment found that Bury delivers Good standard of adult social care, with strengths in leadership, effective safeguarding, partnership working and a clear strategic vision. Members expressed their thanks to all staff and partners for their work and contribution, and officers thanked cross-party Councillors for their part in the inspection and outcome.

Decision:

Cabinet noted outcome of the CQC inspection of Adult Social Care.

Reasons for the decision:

N/A

Alternative options considered and rejected:

N/A

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Corporate Services presented a report regarding the Council's final outturn position across the General Fund revenue and Capital budgets, Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). Councillor Thorpe reported that the General Fund outturn position was an overspend of £7.266m, which represented a favourable movement of £0.673m from the Quarter 3 forecast overspend. 68.19% of savings targets had been delivered, with the rest programmed in for next year. The Capital Programme had also seen slippage and would be reviewed and reprofiled with regards to delivery. It was noted that a drawdown of £7.266m from the budget stabilisation reserve has been required, and the reserve was no longer sufficient to support the forecast funding gap beyond 2027/28, though work continued on the budget review to identify savings and income generation.

In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that:

·       The next 12 months would be a critical time, and nothing was “off the table” in terms of financial savings..

·       Savings plans put in place months or even years ago were starting to take effect (e.g. in Childrens Services). These had taken a long time to embed but were now showing financial benefits.

·       The biggest contributor to the non-service specific overspend was the delayed housing integration which was being closely monitored.

·       Internal governance structures were much stronger, giving better oversight and tracking of savings delivery, an identifying slippage or delays much sooner.

·       Care in the Community costs were split with NHS, and work was underway with NHS partners to review arrangements.

·       Underspend in personal budgets were followed up to ensure residents were happy.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Noted the 2025/26 revenue outturn position of a £7.266m overspend (3.04%) against a net budget of £238.987m;

2.    Noted the in-year reduction in General Fund and Earmarked Reserves of £19.509m (30.67%) and closing balance at 31 March 2026 of £44.106m;

3.    Noted the 2025/26 achievement of savings of £7.729m (68%) against a target of £11.334m;

4.    Noted the overall 2025/26 capital programme outturn position of £100.413m, (84%) compared to the overall 2025/26 capital programme budget of £119.614m. This results in a £19.201m variance, mainly driven by £17.336m of rephased schemes into 2026/27, alongside £0.993m from schemes not progressed and £0.872m of savings across housing projects;

5.    Approved the in-year capital slippage of £17.336m being initially transferred into 2026/27 to enable an in-year review of the deliverability of the capital programme to be undertaken and the programme re-profiled accordingly;

6.    Noted the 2025/26 outturn position for the Collection Fund;

7.    Noted the 2025/26 outturn position for the Housing Revenue Account (HRA); and

8.    Noted the 2025/26 outturn position for the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG).

Reasons for the decision:

To note the final financial outturn position for 2025/26 subject to external audit.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

N/A

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Corporate Services presented a report providing an overview of progress for strategic priorities and delivery objectives during Quarter Four (January to March 2026) and the overall position at year end. Councillor Thorpe advised that the position was positive on the whole, with the majority of objectives delivered or on track, and mitigations in place for amber risks. He advised of one red rated risk, relating to the impact of an external provider delaying the flood defences at Hardy’s Gate bridge and, in response to Members’ questions, it was noted that there were other flood defences in the area and the external company was still committed to carry out the works.

In response to further questions, it was noted that the PRU site at Milton Road was on track for an opening date in September 2028, and the Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) programme in place from September 2026 was welcomed, but support to help families before reaching crisis point continued. With regards to a rise in staff sickness, it was noted that this was a national trend across the public sector from increased pressure on staff, and Bury continued to develop programmes of support for staff mental health and wellbeing. With regards to Bury Market, it was noted that the problems were very complex to find solutions for and of a highly technical nature. Officers confirmed that the Markets Team communicated regularly with market traders, but more collaborative communication work was now needed. 

Finally, Councillor Thorpe advised that the reduction in agency staff had been successful and was continuing, with a strong employment offer being an inducement to work in Bury; an overview of the Unit 4 software could be provided outside of the meeting; KPIs were reviewed to ensure they remained appropriate, and a breakdown of households in temporary accommodation could be provided outside of the meeting.

Decision:

Cabinet noted the Quarter Four position on progress against the Corporate Plan 2025/26

Reasons for the decision:

To enable transparency and robust monitoring of performance and delivery of the Corporate Plan.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

Not applicable.

The Cabinet Member for Adult Care, Health and Public Service Reform presented a report regarding the Quarter 4 reporting for Adult Social Care, including delivery of the Adult Social Care Strategic Plan, preparation for the Care Quality Commission (CQC) Assessment, and the department's performance framework. Thanks were extended to staff in Killelea House, which had achieved an Outstanding rating in the recent CQC inspection.

In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that the Care Act assessment waiting list had been reduced from 83 to 68; and work was in place to reduce this further. Waiting lists were reviewed regularly and governed by the Waiting Well protocol, with individual care needs triaged at each stage of the journey. With regards to complaints, these were varied in subject and significance, but still represented a low number compared to number of residents served.

Decision:

Cabinet noted the report.

Reasons for the decision:

N/A

Alternative options considered and rejected:

N/A

The Leader presented a report regarding the Bury Local Plan, a long-term framework to manage future growth and development in the Borough from 2022 to 2043, setting out locally specific planning policies used to determine and shape future planning applications and development proposals. Members noted this had been updated as a result of representations received during the public consultation period and would go out for further consultation before a final version would seek Council approval.

It was noted that this report was discussed in detail at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting the previous evening, and recommendations had been noted.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Approved the Publication Bury Local Plan, Policies Map and supporting background documents and invite representations over for an eight-week period commencing no earlier than 10 July 2026; and
2. Delegated power to the Executive Director of Place to make minor non-material editorial amendments to the Publication Local Plan before the invitation to make representations commences.

Reasons for the decision:

To ensure that stakeholders have a further opportunity to have their say on the emerging Bury Local Plan.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

To not approve the Publication Local Plan, Policies Map and supporting background documents. This would prevent stakeholders commenting on the Publication Local Plan and would result in the future adoption of the document being contrary to planning regulations and legal requirements.

The Leader presented three reports regarding the results of the consultations on Development Framework Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) for Simister Bowlee, Walshaw, and Elton Reservoir, and seeking approval for the final SPDs to be adopted. It was noted that these reports were discussed in detail at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting the previous evening, and recommendations had been noted.

In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that:

• Any planning application would wait until a site-wide ecology strategy for Walshaw was in place; this, as for all evidence, would need to be in place either before or alongside applications.
• The Infrastructure, Phasing and Delivery Strategy for Elton Reservoir was a live document primarily used by Planning Department but could be shared with Members when significant updates and changes are made.
• Phasing of developments was ensured through close working with developers so milestones were met and community infrastructure projects delivered alongside. The SPDs would ensure comprehensive evidence and strategies were in place before planning applications came in to ensure the Council could attach relevant and specific conditions and permissions to ensure delivery of the whole site was achieved.
• It was noted that these decisions tonight were not about allocating land or the principle of whether development could take place, as those decisions had been taken in previous years; these decisions were about governing applications when they came forward.
• It was noted that these plans would enable other land to be protected and allowed the Council the strongest democratic power to push back on undesirable developments and ensure that the best possible suite of infrastructure was delivered alongside developments. 
• The Conservative Group noted their concerns about the principle of plans.
• A comprehensive discussion was held at Overview and Scrutiny regarding the Elton Metrolink station, and it was noted further discussions would take place with TfGM.

Simister Bowlee Development Framework Decision:

Subject to approval by Rochdale, Cabinet:

1.             Noted the responses to the public consultation and proposed post consultation revisions set out in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 to this report;

2.             Approved the revised SPD as the final version to be adopted and published; and

3.             Delegated authority to the Executive Director (Place) to make any minor, non-material editorial amendments to the SPD ahead of its final publication.

Walshaw Development Framework Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Noted the responses to the public consultation and proposed post consultation revisions set out in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 to this report;
2. Approved the revised SPD as the final version to be adopted and published; and
3. Delegated authority to the Executive Director (Place) to make any minor, non-material editorial amendments to the SPD ahead of its final publication.

Elton Reservoir Development Framework Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Noted the responses to the public consultation and proposed post consultation revisions set out in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 to this report;
2. Approved the revised SPD as the final version to be adopted and published;
3. Delegated authority to the Executive Director (Place) to make any minor, non-material editorial amendments to the SPD ahead of its final publication.

Reasons for the decisions:

The adoption of the documents will establish frameworks against which future planning applications on the sites will be considered, set out high level design and development principles for the sites and approaches to the delivery and phasing of infrastructure on and off sites.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

No other options were considered/were applicable.

The Cabinet Member for Housing Services presented a report regarding the re-procurement of the Council's Gas Compliance, Repairs and Maintenance service to ensure the continued safe servicing, repair and maintenance of heating and hot water systems within the Council's housing stock. In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that performance would be monitored through monthly meetings with the provider to review Key Performance Indicators, and that tenants should raise any issues over the phone; as these were gas repairs, the Council response was normally within 24 hours. It was noted that detail regarding the costs of the three-month extension of the existing contract would be provided to Members outside the meeting.

Decision:

Cabinet approved the re-procurement of Gas Compliance, Repairs and Maintenance services for the Council.

Reasons for the decision:

To maintain compliance with The Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 and statutory obligations of the Procurement Act 2023 and ensures principles of fairness, transparency, value for money, and accountability. Bury Council is currently in contract with ‘Sureserve Compliance North West’ until 31 December 2026, and who are currently delivering the Gas Compliance, Repairs and Maintenance for the Council. This contract is due to end on 31st December 2026, and whilst the contract does not provide a contractual right to extend, it is proposed that it be extended by a further period of 3 months to 31st March 2027.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

All five procurement options listed in the report are being considered.

The Cabinet Member for Housing Services presented a report seeking approval of contract awards for Carbon reduction schemes as part of the approved Housing Revenue Account (“HRA”) Capital Works Programme for 2026/27. The measures aim to provide improved thermal comfort and ventilation, while reducing carbon emissions, energy consumption and bills for Bury residents. In response to Members’ questions it was agreed that detail regarding any pro rata cost increase from the extension and a breakdown of social value cost-benefit would be provided to Members outside the meeting.

Decision:

Cabinet agreed:

1. An extension of the existing contract between the Council and A.Connolly Limited (Company number 03860866) in respect of Bent Hill estate, Prestwich, Sedgley Ward – 140 properties, which forms part of Programme A, for a further term of 12 months commencing on 8th September 2026 and a total estimated contract value of £2,100,075.60; and
2. A contract award to NextEnergy Capital Limited (Company number 05975233), in respect of the estates mentioned below which comprise of Programme B, for an initial term of 1 year (proposed commencement date of 31st July 2026) and the option to extend for a further 12 months. The total estimated contract value for the initial term is £2,173,551:
   1. Goshen Estate Redvales Ward - 95 properties
   2. Knowles St Estate Redbank Ward - 6 properties
   3. Sumner Avenue Estate- Radcliffe North and Ainsworth Ward- 24 properties
   4. Decent Home standard - Thermal Comfort fails for 70 properties throughout the borough. These are located within the Redvales, Ramsbottom, Besses, North Manor, and Bury East areas.

Reasons for the decision:

The primary reason for requesting approvals for the programmes from both A.Connolly's and NextEnergy is to ensure continuation of the Bury Council Housing retrofit programme, which is aimed at helping to achieve Energy Performance Certificate (“EPC”) C by 2030 along with aims to reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions. Retrofit surveys are underway in preparation for Social Housing/Warm Homes Fund (Wave 3) grant application which is essential to support HRA capital investment.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

• Do nothing: The Energy schemes are necessary to help achieve legislative requirements of EPC C by 2030 and Net Zero ambitions in line with GMHP by 2038.
• Deliver Inhouse: Due to the specialist scope of work within these contracts there is both a lack of suitable skills and capacity for the in-house contractor (Repairs Direct).
• Re-tender: This option was considered for AConnolly's relating to the Bent Hill scheme and would be possible; however, this would involve a significantly extended procurement process in both time and cost.

The Leader presented a report regarding the outcome of the draft Hot Food Takeaway Supplementary Planning Document (SPD19) consultation and seeking approval for the final SPD to be formally adopted. The Cabinet Member for Adult Care, Health and Public Service Reform noted his particular thanks to the Public Health team for their contribution, and the meaningful contribution impact this would have on residents.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Noted the responses to the public consultation and the proposed post-consultation revisions;
2. Approved draft SPD19 –Hot Food Takeaways as the final version to be adopted and published; and
3. Delegated authority to the Executive Director (Place), to make any minor non-material editorial amendments to the SPD ahead of its final publication.

Reasons for the decision:

• SPD19 provides additional detail and guidance on the implementation of existing Development Plan policies that are used to determine proposals for Hot Food Takeaways. It provides supporting information and guidance on how the Local Planning Authority will assess planning applications for hot food takeaways where planning permission is required.
• The adoption of the document and revocation of the previous SPD19 would ensure that all relevant planning applications are considered against up-to-date policy guidance.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

To not adopt the revised SPD19 – Hot Food Takeaways.

The Cabinet Member for Housing Services presented a report regarding the implementation of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 legislation, bringing in changes to the private rented sector and strengthening the role of local authorities as regulators while offering greater protection for renters. In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that implementation commenced in May 2026, with subsequent phases continuing beyond 2026. The timescales presented challenges for all authorities, particularly in the context of workforce capacity shortages. However, measures had been put in place to strengthen resilience, including the development of apprenticeship programmes.

Members discussed the Phase 2 rollout of the national private rented sector landlord database and agreed that it had the potential to deliver benefits for both landlords and tenants. It was noted that arrangements for sharing the database had yet to be confirmed; however, further information would be circulated once details became available.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Noted the implementation of the Renters’ Rights Act on 1st May 2026;
2. Approved the amendments to the existing enforcement policy and adopt the Justice for Tenant’s Civil Penalty Policy;
3. Delegated authority to the Assistant Director of Public Protection and Resilience, in consultation with the Director of Law and Governance, to implement any further policies required or make further amendments to existing policies;
4. Supported investment in staffing and digital systems to deliver Private Rented Sector regulation; and
5. Noted the alignment with Corporate Plan priorities and the Housing Strategy.

Reasons for the decision:

To ensure the Council can fully meet its statutory duties under section 107 of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025. The recommendations provide a clear, consistent and legally robust framework for enforcement decision-making, reducing the risk of legal challenge and associated reputational risk. Making minor amendments to the existing Enforcement Policy will enable timely and effective implementation, building on a policy that is already considered robust. Adopting the Act-specific Civil Penalty Policy will further ensure consistency, transparency and proportionality in the application of penalties under the new legislative framework, while aligning the council’s approach with national best practice and mitigating the risk of challenge arising from local deviation.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

• Not to implement policy changes
• To adopt both the JfT/ACEHO Civil Penalty Policy and Enforcement Polices to replace the existing local policies.

The Cabinet Member for Housing Services presented a report regarding delivery of the Local Authority Housing Fund Round 4 (LAHF R4), which provides capital funding to increase the supply of high-quality temporary accommodation to reduce reliance on Bed and Breakfast (B&B) placements for homeless families, and support accommodation for households under the Afghan Resettlement Programme providing long-term affordable assets for the Council. Members voiced their support in the invest-to-save approach, reducing pressures on Council budgets while providing benefits to residents. In response to Members’ questions it was noted that a breakdown of waiting lists would be provided to Members outside the meeting.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Approved the use of £701,000 from the total £1,176,000 combined grant allocation and match funding from the General Fund Capital Programme of £1,051,500 for 2026/27 delivery, to enable the acquisition of eight properties; and
2. Noted that, based on current interest rates of circa 6.44% for 30-year PWLB money, the estimated interest cost of borrowing will be just below £0.068m per annum or £0.204m over the first three years. This will support the reduction of reliance on unsuitable and high cost temporary accommodation over the longer term. (The Council used this approach for the delivery on the previous round of funding under LAFH R3).

Reasons for the decision:

Approval is needed for the 60% General Fund Capital Programme match funding required under the LAHF R4 agreement to support the purchase of eight properties. Rents will be set at affordable rent levels. This approach supports long-term sustainability reflecting an invest-to-save model, reducing reliance on expensive Bed and Breakfast placements. Estimated reductions are approximately £0.170m over the first three full years. This compares favourably to the debt interest costs of £0.204m over the same three-year period for borrowing from PWLB to fund the match contribution. In addition, the properties will be let at Affordable Rent, which over an extended period estimated at 37 years will recover the initial principal costs incurred to purchase them. The proposal aligns with LAHF R4 grant conditions enabling the Council to meet its statutory housing duties while easing financial pressure.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

Do nothing: These properties will provide long-term, financially sustainable temporary accommodation for the borough, with the council contributing only 60% of the acquisition cost. If this option is not pursued, the council may need to continue relying on expensive bed and breakfast placements, which would not support a cost-effective, invest-to-save approach.

The Cabinet Member for Housing Services presented a report regarding the re-procurement of the Community Accommodation Service Tier 3 (CAS3), a service supporting individuals leaving prison custody, providing supported accommodation and independent living skills, helping to break cycles of homelessness and reoffending.

In response to Members’ questions it was noted that the Council worked with Prevention to carry out a full risk assessment for individuals coming out of prison to identify the best placements and ensure they had the safest place based on their individual circumstances. Members were advised that homeless properties wouldn’t normally be advertised owing to safeguarding concerns, but any properties requiring a planning class change would have the appropriate planning records and permissions. It was noted that a proportional breakdown of contributing factors in the rise in homelessness would be provided to Members outside the meeting.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Authorised Bury Council to initiate a tender exercise via The Chest to identify a provider to deliver the Community Accommodation Service Tier 3 , in line with the requirements set out in the grant agreement with the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, with an initial term of 14 months of total estimated contract value (for the initial term) of £430,596, and option to extend for a further 6 months; and
2. Authorised the Director of Housing to approve the award of the new contract without the need for further approval from Cabinet.

Reasons for the decision:

There has been a significant increase in the number of individuals experiencing homelessness. This cohort includes individuals leaving prison custody, who often face additional barriers to securing and maintaining stable accommodation. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (“MHCLG”) has recently set out outcome measures for local authorities as part of its updated strategy, including an ambitious objective to ensure that no individual leaves an institution into homelessness.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

• These properties will deliver emergency accommodation preventing individuals leaving custody homeless and rough sleeping. If this option is not pursued, the council will be unlikely to achieve a reduction in rough sleeping, which conflicts with our local, regional, and national homelessness strategies. We would also fail in delivering this joint commissioned programme. This would present a risk of reputational damage and a failure to meet our corporate responsibilities.
• CAS3 is joint commissioned programme between the GMCA and MoJ and has been delivered by the local authorities since 2022. The programme continues to build on its success year on year and remains a key resource in preventing, breaking cycles of homelessness and reducing re-offending. Due to current capacity constraints within the service, the ongoing challenges in securing suitable accommodation to support delivery, and its status as an externally grant-funded programme with a fixed cost envelope CAS3 is most effectively delivered by an external provider.

The Cabinet Member for Housing Services presented a report regarding the next stage of activities to achieve the orderly closing down of the Six Town Housing Limited (STH LTD) business operation to progress to the final closure of STH as an entity owned by Bury Council, a process begun in September 2025. The Cabinet Member gave assurances to tenants that they would be able to stay in their homes and any decision would be made with their best interests as priority.

In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that, if properties were transferred to another provider, they would be governed by the same regulator and held to the same standards. Any repairs would be carried out by the Council up to the day of transfer, with Bury continuing to provide support to ensure a smooth transition. It was also noted that staff members affected was small, with no staff requiring TUPE arrangements.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Noted the findings of the initial assessment and notes that further detailed analysis will be available after the soft market test;
2. Confirmed that the timely and orderly closure of STH LTD to reduce regulatory and operational risk remains the overriding priority; and
3. Approved a phase of soft market testing to assess market interest in options 1 and 2 with a further report to be brought back to Cabinet in September setting out the findings and a preferred option.

Reasons for the decision:

Five potential options for the future of the STH LTD and its housing stock portfolio have been identified, but further work, including a soft market testing exercise and full impact assessment on the HRA is required before a preferred option can be confirmed.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

The option to “do nothing” is not appropriate since Cabinet has resolved to close down the STH LTD entity to remove the risk to Bury Council.

The Cabinet Member for Housing Services presented a report regarding the development of a new Housing Strategy, which will replace the existing 2021 – 2025 version. This report sought Cabinet approval to commence a 12-week public consultation on the draft strategy, after which the final version would come back to Cabinet for approval.

In response to Members' questions, it was noted that feedback on the management of previous consultations would be welcomed. Members were advised that arc4, the organisation responsible for collating the evidence used to inform the strategy, had been operating for many years. It was further noted that representations received during the consultation process would be taken into account in the final version of the strategy, which would be presented to Cabinet for approval. Prior to this, the strategy could be considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee should it wish to do so.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Noted the work to date on developing the draft Housing Strategy which was attached at Appendix 1;
2. Approved that formal public consultation for a period of twelve weeks should be undertaken to gather views and opinions on the draft Housing Strategy, ensuring that these are duly considered before a final version is prepared for Cabinet approval;
3. Delegated authority to the Director of Housing to make any non-material amendments to the draft strategy, prior to consultation if required; and
4. Noted that following consultation, a final proposed Housing Strategy and delivery plan will be submitted to Cabinet for approval and adoption. The accompanying report will summarise the outcome of the public consultation.

Reasons for the decision:

• Public consultation on a housing strategy constitutes a formal decision under the Council’s governance arrangements and must therefore be authorised by the Cabinet. This ensures compliance with the principles of good governance, openness, and accountability.
• To ensure that the draft Housing Strategy is subject to meaningful engagement while proposals remain at a formative stage, in accordance with the Gunning Principles.
• Consulting residents and stakeholders, including those with protected characteristics, enables the Council to gather valuable feedback, local intelligence, practical expertise, potential equality impacts/mitigation, and fosters shared commitment to implementation.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

Retain the existing Housing Strategy to deliver Bury’s housing priorities and guide inclusive growth and investment in the borough - This option has been rejected because the existing Housing Strategy is now outdated due to changes in national policy, service delivery arrangements and the findings of a statutory review of housing needs undertaken in November 2025.

The Leader presented a report which detailed the outcomes of the draft Houses in Multiple Occupation Supplementary Planning Document (SPD13) consultation and sought approval for the final SPD to be formally adopted. It was noted that this had received cross-party support through a motion at Cabinet. Members discussed the difficulty in registering smaller HMOs built through permitted development rights, noting the Council’s small team, and requesting public to let officers or Councillors know of any HMOs in their area.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Noted the responses to the public consultation and the proposed post-consultation revisions;
2. Approved the revised SPD13 – Houses in Multiple Occupation as the final version to be adopted and published;
3. Delegated authority to the Executive Director (Place) to make any minor, non-material editorial amendments to the SPD; and
4. Approved the revocation of the existing SPD13 – Conversion of Buildings to Houses in Multiple Occupation.

Reasons for the decision:

• SPD13 provides additional detail and guidance on the implementation of existing Development Plan policies that are used to determine proposals for Houses in Multiple Occupation. It provides guidance on some of the key issues to be considered in determining planning applications for Houses in Multiple Occupation, setting out comprehensive guidance on location requirements and design considerations for new HMOs.
• The adoption of the document and revocation of the previous SPD13 would ensure that all relevant planning applications are considered against up-to-date policy guidance.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

To not adopt the revised SPD13 – Houses in Multiple Occupation.

Claire Rogan presented the year-end performance position for 2025/26, the proposed targets for 2026/27, and an update on the Housing Risk Register in line with the Regulator of Social Housing Sector Risk Profile. Members were advised that the service remains in a period of transition, with improving foundations alongside ongoing performance and assurance challenges.

The Committee noted that overall tenant satisfaction had improved, alongside strong performance in complaints handling and compliance, particularly in areas such as fire, gas and asbestos safety. However, a number of key service areas remain below target, most notably repairs performance, communication, and aspects of property condition.

Members discussed the continued pressures within the repairs service, including legacy backlogs, capacity issues and data quality improvements, which have contributed to reduced performance in non-emergency repairs. These issues were reflected within the Risk Register, where repairs delivery, disrepair and associated financial exposure remain high risks, although improvement activity is underway.

The Committee also considered financial pressures, noting increasing rent arrears alongside wider cost of living impacts on tenants. This was recognised as both a performance concern and a continuing risk to the sustainability of the service.

Data quality was highlighted as a significant cross-cutting issue, impacting both performance reporting and overall assurance. Members noted that while limitations remain, improvements are being progressed through system transformation and strengthened governance arrangements.

In terms of governance and assurance, Members acknowledged that while appropriate frameworks are in place, further work is required to strengthen Board-level oversight and demonstrate effective scrutiny in line with regulatory expectations. Tenant voice was also identified as an area requiring further development, with improvement activity underway.

Members noted that performance targets for 2026/27 have been set at a stretching level to drive improvement and better align with sector benchmarks, supported by a revised and more focused set of performance indicators.

It was agreed:

1.    Members noted the 2025/26 year-end performance position and associated challenges

2.    Approved the proposed performance indicators and targets for 2026/27

3.    Endorsed the key improvement priorities and areas of focus for the coming year

4.    Reviewed the new suggested PI’s highlighted in the target setting report.

5.    Noted the current Housing Risk Register and overall assurance position

6.    Endorsed the proposed approach to strengthening assurance frameworks, governance, and reporting