Harborough District Council leader says he cannot support Leicester's expansion into the district
Harborough District Council's leader has once again joined forces with his colleagues across the county to say that they cannot support a proposed expansion of Leicester’s borders.
The leaders of the seven district and borough councils and Rutland County Council have denied there is any “strong business case” for moving the city boundaries.
The leaders – including Phil Knowles from Harborough District Council – said they also fear the move would “delay” additional powers and funding promised by Westminster as part of its plans to streamline and simplify council structures because it will “add complexity”. Public engagement has also shown “considerable opposition” to the expansion, leaders claimed.
Their comments follow claims by city mayor Sir Peter Soulsby that local leaders had all “acknowledged” that the case for revising Leicester’s boundaries was “unarguable” and that the change was now “widely accepted” – something the district and borough leaders have previously denied.
Parts of the Harborough district are being eyed up to join the city, as well as Glenfield, Oadby, Wigston, Blaby, Whetstone, Syston, Anstey, Leicester Forest East, Birstall, Kirby Muxloe, Thurmaston and Countesthorpe. The expansion plan has proven hugely controversial locally, with many county politicians and residents branding it a “land grab”.
Pip Allnatt, leader of Melton Borough Council, said on behalf of the group: “We understand the city council’s ambition for growth, but the leaders believe that by delivering devolution quickly and collaboratively, we can support growth and deliver economic improvements across Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.”
The city expansion plan comes in response to Westminster’s requirements for areas with two-tiers of local authority, such as Leicestershire where responsibilities are shared between the district and borough councils and Leicestershire County Council, to reduce these to a single-tier set up. Disagreement reigns locally over what the best approach for the reorganisation.
Three interim plans were put to the council in March. Leicestershire County Council proposed one council for the county, with separate Leicester City and Rutland County councils. The county’s plan would have seen existing boundaries honoured.
However, the authority switched hands at the May election, with Reform UK ousting the ruling Conservative Party to take charge of the council. New leader Dan Harrison has also indicated a preference for a single ‘donut’ authority for the county, but has said he has to “negotiate” over the city’s wish for expansion.
Leicester City Council too is supporting a one council for Leicestershire approach, with Leicester and Rutland once again remaining apart. Sir Peter has argued that the city’s borders have to move outwards to ensure its “financial sustainability” and its ability to deliver the “desperately needed housing” required locally.
The districts and boroughs stand apart, then, with their proposals for two county authorities. Under their plan, one would be created for the areas currently served by Charnwood, North West Leicestershire and Melton district and borough councils, and Rutland County Council. The second would take the regions currently under the control of Blaby, Harborough, Hinckley and Bosworth, and Oadby and Wigston district and borough councils.
While Rutland is included in this plan, the authorities have said the county council’s leaders are also considering a second proposal that could see them join with Lincolnshire instead. The districts have said this is to “ensure all potential options are fully explored before any final decision is reached”.
Final plans for local reorganisation need to be put to the Government in November.
Residents can have their say on the plans. The survey can be found on the Leicester City Council’s consultation page, with residents able to have their say until Monday, October 6.