Agenda item

Report of the Chief Executive Officer / Head of Paid Services

Council gave consideration to the report and appendices (as set out at pages 3 – 160 of the agenda reports pack and pages 3 – 11 of the agenda update) which sought approval for the final proposal.

In light of the technical difficulties Councillor I K Ridley queried how the meeting would be recorded. The Senior Democratic & Electoral Services Officer advised that a fuller version of the minutes would be produced.

The Chief Executive Officer presented the report, highlighting the fact the draft proposal was approved unanimously at the meeting on 28 October and summarising the amendments made to the proposal following feedback from each of the involved Councils’ meetings, which were agreed by each of the Council’s Leaders.

Councillor M H Charlesworth raised queries relating to an economic imbalance between the proposed North and South unitaries and the sustainability of the City unitary, including whether the final document will address the issue of the City’s’ enlargement. Councillor M H Charlesworth stressed that if the issue is not addressed it would be a serious flaw and could affect the government’s decision on whether to approve the proposal.

The Chief Executive Officer advised that in terms of the North/South divide, the Council Leaders were satisfied that there is balance in the proposal regarding financial sustainability, geography and partnerships. It was also advised that the issue raised regarding the City was addressed in section 2 of the proposal and the financial sustainability of the City at page 9, which sets out analysis of their finances and funding. The Chief Executive Officer also advised further work was being done to strengthen the proposal regarding the belief that the City would be sustainable.

The Leader of the Council also addressed the points made by Councillor M H Charlesworth, advising that the Section 151 Officers for each Council had done detailed work around the sustainability of all the proposed unitaries and that independent financial advisors had also looked into the issue around the City’s sustainability and taking into account the deprivation in the city and the fairer funding formula, as well as the change in formula for the housing targets set out by government that the City will be sustainable. The Leader also reiterated the fact that this local government reorganisation was forced onto the Council, and that while the Council would prefer the status quo, it had a duty to work on creating a proposal that would be the best option for local residents.

The Leader went onto outline the proposal highlighting the fact that the North-City-Couth proposal was the closest to meeting the governments’ aims for the reorganisation and that it received strong support from the public with over 6000 responses to the public consultation.

The Leader of the Opposition echoed the Leaders’ sentiments and thanked Officers and Members for their hard work, stating that he was pleased with the alignment of all Councillors on this proposal whether Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Independents. The Leader of the Opposition queried the population densities of the unitaries and whether the arguments against the City’s expansion were robust enough to prevent it.

The Leader of the Council advised that the proposal has closely balanced the populations for the unitaries and that with the work of all the Section 151 Officers and independent advisors they were confident that the proposal was sound and that the City unitary was sustainable without expansion. It was also stated that the City Mayor had failed to effectively run the city and that expansion would not fix their problems and that instead they needed to focus on their own finances. It was also stated that the Councils had all met with all the Leicestershire MPs, excluding Neil O’Brien, and that they were all supportive of the proposal. The Leader expressed her disappointment in this constituency’s MP and while they had spoken with him and he had expressed support for the proposal, he was still yet to give his official endorsement, so she again wished to urge him to send a letter of endorsement as this would help strengthen the case for this proposal.

The Deputy Leader of the Council echoed the sentiments of the Leader and that while they disagreed with the local government reform, it was not their choice and they had a responsibility to put forward this proposal. The Deputy Leader asked that all Members show unity and advised that it is not for the County to sort out the City’s issues.

Both the Chief Executive Officer and the Leader of the Council’s full statements are attached.

It was moved by the Leader of the Council, seconded by the Deputy Leader of the Council and

RESOLVED THAT:

i)            The final proposal for a three unitary model for local government reorganisation in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland (North, City, South) attached at Appendix 2 be endorsed; and

ii)           The authority to consider and agree any amendments to the final proposal prior to submission to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government by 28 November 2025 be delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader.

For                  13

Against          0

Abstentions  1