The Community, Cultural, and Corporate Services Scrutiny Committee of Lancashire County Council met on Friday, 11 September 2026, to review a Cabinet decision regarding the cessation of refugee resettlement administration. The committee ultimately decided not to refer the decision back to Cabinet for reconsideration.

Call-In Request: Refugee Resettlement

The committee considered a call-in request concerning the Cabinet's decision to cease Lancashire County Council's administration of refugee resettlement schemes. The call-in was initiated by several county councillors who argued that the decision breached several of the council's decision-making principles, including proportionality, value for money, impartiality, and the assessment of impact on human rights, equality, diversity, and sustainability.

County Councillor Azhar Ali and County Councillor Adrian Owens presented the case for the call-in. They argued that withdrawing from the schemes would cost the council approximately £800,000 per year to backfill statutory services that were previously supported by the resettlement grant. They also questioned the rationale behind withdrawing from a scheme that supported vulnerable individuals, suggesting that the decision appeared predetermined due to prior public statements made by Cabinet Member for Rural Affairs, Environment and Communities, County Councillor Joshua Roberts. Concerns were also raised about the lack of discussion on confidential information (Annex D) during the Cabinet meeting.

County Councillor Joshua Roberts, Cabinet Member for Rural Affairs, Environment and Communities, responded to the call-in. He stated that the decision was made in accordance with all 12 decision-making principles, including those highlighted in the call-in. He explained that the administration of these schemes is not a statutory function of the county council and that housing, a core element of resettlement, is the responsibility of district and unitary authorities. Councillor Roberts asserted that the decision was about ensuring the right body was administering the schemes and that a managed transition would minimise disruption. He also defended his previous statements, arguing that indicating an intention does not equate to a closed mind, as per Section 25 of the Localism Act 2011. He further clarified that the decision was influenced by procurement considerations, as contracts were coming up for renewal.

Following presentations and debate, the committee voted on whether to refer the decision back to Cabinet. The committee decided by a majority not to ask Cabinet to reconsider its decision. Therefore, the Cabinet's original decision to cease the administration of refugee resettlement schemes can now be implemented.