Consultation rejected city expansion – Government approved it

By Chris Harper, Local Democracy Reporter & HFM

Leicestershire residents were “ignored” according to critics of an expanded city boundary after data revealed almost 90 per cent of people disagreed with the plan.

According to new data released by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) and seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS), 87 per cent of the 6,615 respondents to a consultation on local government reorganisation said they disagreed with the plans to expand Leicester city’s boundary.

Despite that, the government confirmed last week the move will go ahead and mean Leicester will expand into areas of Oadby, Wigston, Syston, Enderby, Great Glen, Braunstone Town, Blaby, Anstey and Glenfield.

It also means that from 2028, all existing Leicestershire councils will be abolished and replaced with two larger authorities – one for the city and another for the rest of the county, plus Rutland.

The MHCLG data shows that out of the responses, a majority of people had backed plans to make three unitary councils – or the North, City, South proposal – instead.

The North, City, South plan was submitted by seven district and borough councils around Leicestershire, including Blaby District Council, North West Leicestershire District Council and others.

70 per cent of people who responded to the Government’s consultation said they agreed with the North, City, South approach, while 21 per cent disagreed.

Meanwhile, only 35 per cent of people agreed with Leicestershire County Council’s plan of a two-unitary council structure with more than half – or 54 per cent – of people disagreeing with the proposal.

Explaining the decision further in a letter to council leaders last Thursday (July 16), the former Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government Steve Reed argued that creating “two balanced authorities” will help shift power away from government and into local communities.

He said: “We need to devolve power out of Whitehall so that we can rebalance wealth, power and opportunity across our country. But devolution must be built on strong local councils that can deliver good public services, support growth, and remain closely connected to the communities they serve.

“Reorganisation provides us with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to ensure that councils genuinely represent the communities they serve today and stand the test of time.”

One of the biggest concerns from respondents was that the city expansion would divide established parishes and historic village communities and expressed that maintaining distinct local, rural, and community identities and effective representation was “crucial” to the county.

Critics also said they had “concerns about service delivery, fiscal management and efficiency” while also questioning the  economic and strategic
justification for the expansion,” with there being uncertainty over “financial sustainability and whether the proposals would deliver tangible benefits”.

However, half of the responding education bodies in Leicester and Leicestershire supported the city boundary changes, arguing it would create economies of scale and improve public services.

Proponents of the city boundary expansion also argued that it better reflected “how people live, work and use services” and “improve financial sustainability, reduce fragmentation and deliver efficiencies through projected savings”.

However, local politicians claim that the Government have “ignored” Leicestershire residents after the data was released.

Conservative leader of Blaby District Council Ben Taylor said that the message from residents “couldn’t have been clearer”.

He added: “The North, City, South unitary proposal was the most popular option with around 70 per cent positive support, while the City expansion proposal received just seven per cent positive support.

“Yet the Government has chosen the option that local people overwhelmingly rejected.

“Residents spoke. Councils spoke. The consultation results were clear. Yet the Government has ignored them and delivered the least popular and most complicated option.”

Conservative MP for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston, Neil O’Brien, also called the data “a slap in the face”.

In a statement, city mayor Sir Peter Soulsby told the LDRS: “Back in the 1970s, exactly these same sorts of reservations and concerns were expressed by people living in the areas around Sheffield, around Leeds, around Bradford.

“Of course, they all had their boundaries extended and the people in those extended boundaries now accept they have benefited enormously from having a vote and a say in the governance of those cities.

“Local Government Reorganisation is, in effect, a catch-up for areas like Leicester, Nottingham, Derby, that were left out in the 1970s. And while there was concern then, and we appreciate that there will be concern now, it will soon pass and people will feel they have a greater stake in their city.”

Cllr Simon Whelband, leader of Harborough District Council, has written to Angela Raynor, the new Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, requesting an urgent meeting to discuss the situation, a move supported by leader of the opposition, Cllr Phil Knowles.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government was contacted for comment.