The Environment, Economic Growth and Transport Scrutiny Committee met on Thursday 23 April 2026 to discuss the gully cleaning policy, street lighting column structural surveys, and the committee's work programme. Key decisions included the formulation of recommendations to the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport regarding the gully cleaning regime and street lighting column replacement prioritisation, and the noting of the committee's work programme for 2025/26.

Gully Cleaning Policy

The committee reviewed the highway gully cleansing regime, which has transitioned from a predominantly reactive service to a planned, preventative maintenance approach. This shift, approved by Cabinet in January 2025, aims to improve efficiency and value for money by implementing a two-year intensive cleansing programme for all gully assets. The new regime has significantly reduced reactive cleansing costs, allowing for increased investment in planned cyclic cleansing.

County Councillor Warren Goldsworthy, Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, and Kirsty Williams, Interim Head of Service Highways Operations and Design, presented the report. They explained that the previous approach was inefficient, with issues often dealt with late and at a higher cost. The new cyclic cleansing approach costs a fraction of a reactive visit, allowing more of the network to be maintained within the same budget. This proactive approach helps reduce deterioration to road surfaces, improves asset life, and lowers safety risks such as aquaplaning and ice formation.

However, councillors raised concerns about the impact on residents and members, particularly regarding the inability to provide fixed cleansing dates and the reduced visibility of the work. Councillor Paul Stubbins highlighted that an 86% reduction in reactive cleaning costs seemed severe and suggested that the criteria might be too strict, leading to issues like continuous water streaming down streets and the formation of ice, which were not always being responded to promptly. Councillor David Whipp echoed these concerns, particularly regarding the lack of clear communication and the potential for residents to feel their issues are not being addressed.

In response, Kirsty Williams acknowledged these challenges, stating that the council was learning and refining the criteria. She noted that the current two-year intensive programme is gathering data to inform a new five-year cyclic approach. The committee agreed to make recommendations to the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport to:

• Share supplementary guidance with all councillors that expands upon the existing criteria to capture situations where the criteria have proven too restrictive.
• Review the policy to potentially relax it or allow for extenuating circumstances, ensuring that the criteria are not overly restrictive and that issues like water surcharging from gullies are addressed urgently.
• Improve communication regarding the reporting of blocked gullies, ensuring that messages received by residents reflect the reality of the timescale for the problem being dealt with.
• Increase the funding available for drainage works to address the backlog, estimated at over £7 million.
• Pursue structures funding for drainage work on the M65 motorway as a matter of urgency.

Street Lighting Column Routine Structural Surveys

The committee reviewed the approach to the removal and prioritisation of replacement of street lighting columns. Paul Binks, Highways Asset Manager, presented the report, explaining that while Lancashire County Council has the power to provide lighting, it does not have a statutory duty to do so. However, if lighting is provided, the council has a duty of care to maintain it in a safe condition.

The report highlighted that Lancashire has a high density of street lighting columns, with a significant proportion being over 40 years old. The current condition of the stock is considered POOR, and the number of columns over 40 years old remains a corporate risk. The council uses Guidance Note 22 (GN22) to assess the structural condition of columns, with a risk-based approach to testing and replacement.

Councillors expressed concerns about the impact of removing lighting columns on community safety and the feeling of safety for residents, particularly in rural areas or on country lanes where a single removed column can leave a significant stretch unlit. Councillor David Whipp noted that community safety is a significant factor for residents and questioned how this is taken into account. Councillor Joel Michael Tetlow raised the issue of cost-efficiency, suggesting that replacing a column immediately after removal might be more cost-effective than leaving a stump and returning later.

The committee discussed the challenges of prioritising replacements, especially when budget constraints mean that not all removed columns can be immediately replaced. The current approach prioritises conflict areas (junctions, crossings) and consecutive columns (where two or more have been removed).

Several recommendations were made to the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport:

• Introduce a notification process for councillors when a street lighting column is removed and not immediately replaced, providing the reason for removal and the likely replacement timeframe. This would allow councillors to communicate with residents and manage concerns.
• Consider working with partner organisations, such as local police, to incorporate community safety data into the prioritisation of lighting column replacements.
• Add a third priority to the replacement system: Locations where their removal could significantly reduce actual or perceived personal safety, particularly for vulnerable or protected groups.
• Explore the potential for repairing or strengthening existing concrete or metal columns as an alternative to immediate removal, potentially extending their lifespan.
• Review the budget allocation for street lighting, acknowledging the significant gap between the allocated funding and the estimated cost to replace all aging columns.
• Consider the possibility of installing car charging points on lighting columns to generate income to help fund replacements.

Environment, Economic Growth and Transport Scrutiny Committee Work Programme 2025/26

The committee noted the work programme for 2025/26, which outlines planned scrutiny activities across areas such as climate change, the environment, highways and transport, and economic development and growth. The committee also noted formal written responses from Cabinet Members regarding previous recommendations on Household Waste Recycling Centres and the Get Lancashire Working initiative.

During the discussion on the work programme, Councillor Paul Stubbins raised concerns about the meeting's end time, noting that the displayed time suggested a later finish than anticipated, which had impacted the attendance of some speakers. It was agreed that future meeting end times should be clearly communicated to members and speakers.

The committee also agreed to add a review of streetlighting structural surveys to its work programme, with a report to be presented at the next meeting. Discussions also highlighted the need for a representative from highways management and the Flood Risk Management team to attend the next meeting to discuss the gully cleaning policy.