Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Submit Guest Post

Leicester residents invited to shape future of local councils

Revamp of local authorities aims to save money and improve services

Leicester residents invited to shape future of local councils

The proposed reorganisation could save £43m a year, say council leaders, but critics question the figure

RESIDENTS can now have their say on a plan which would see the number of local councils in Leicestershire drop from eight to two.

The proposal is one of three put forward for the political re-organisation of Leicestershire after the government told local leaders it wanted areas with two tiers of councils – such as the county – to reduce it to a single-tier set up.


That does not mean just one authority for Leicestershire, however, with the eight district and borough councils, along with Rutland County Council, believing residents would be better served if Leicestershire was split in two. They are proposing one new council for the north of Leicestershire and Rutland, and a second covering the south and the city to remain separate.

Their proposal is at odds with the options put forward by Leicester City Council and Leicestershire County Council, both of which believe one ‘doughnut’ authority, taking in all of the county but leaving Rutland and the city separate, is a better approach.

Leicester mayor Sir Peter Soulsby also believes that city borders should expand to take in parts of Leicestershire, something the remaining council leaders and many county residents all say they oppose.

Now, the district and borough councils are seeking residents’ opinions on their “North, City, South” proposal.

Under the plan, the areas currently served by Charnwood, North West Leicestershire and Melton district and borough councils, and Rutland County Council, would be served by one authority, called the “North Leicestershire and Rutland” council.

Those under the control of Blaby, Harborough, Hinckley and Bosworth, and Oadby and Wigston district and borough councils would be served by the second authority, called “South Leicestershire” council. District and borough leaders believe this would allow councils to stay “connected and accountable” to the communities they serve, while still simplifying services and saving money, as the government has demanded.

The leaders said this approach could save nearly £43 million a year. However, this figure was disputed by the previous leaders of the county council who put the figure closer to £17 million.

Speaking on behalf of the eight authorities, leader of Melton Borough Council Pip Allnatt said: “Councils in the area are facing the biggest change in over 50 years and it is vital our communities are involved in helping to shape the future of local government. We encourage people, businesses and organisations to take part in the survey and tell us their views on our plans.

“This is the second time we have asked for views, and earlier this year more than 4,600 people and organisations responded to our original survey to help inform our interim plan… we will continue to make strenuous efforts to gather views from our communities and partners. Please have your say.”

The survey asks residents whether they agree with the principle of replacing the two-tier system with a single council structure, if they agree with the North, City, South approach put forward by the districts and boroughs, and if they agree with the areas proposed to be joined together under that plan.

The survey can be found on the North City South website with residents able to respond until Sunday, July 20. An explainer of all of the proposed changes and their impact on residents is also available there.

(Local Democracy Reporting Service)

Add EasternEye As Your Trusted Source
preferred source on google news

More For You

IMF

The IMF has urged Britain to consider public spending reforms as the debate over bank taxes intensifies

REUTERS

IMF warns UK against higher bank taxes ahead of October budget

  • The IMF says Britain should consider spending reforms rather than rely on higher taxes on banks.
  • Unions and think tanks argue a higher bank surcharge could raise billions of pounds.
  • Banks and business groups warn further sector-specific taxes could deter investment and weaken competitiveness.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has urged Britain to consider cutting public spending rather than raising taxes on banks, as the Government weighs options to strengthen its finances ahead of the October 28 budget.

Chancellor John Healey is reportedly considering reversing a reduction in the bank tax surcharge, but the IMF has suggested that spending reforms should play a greater role in balancing the public finances.

Keep ReadingShow less