More than 12,000 people have signed a petition against the proposal
L-R MPs Alicia Kearns, Neil O’Brien and Peter Bedford submit a petition against a proposed Leicester expansion plan(Image: Leicestershire Conservatives)
Sir Peter Soulsby has denied proposals for an expanded Leicester are simply a land and tax “grab” following accusations from three Conservative MPs.
Neil O’Brien, Alicia Kearns and Peter Bedford have long been vocal opponents to the city’s plan, which would see swathes of their constituencies drawn inside Leicester’s borders if taken forward by Westminster. They have accused Sir Peter of seeing the communities at the city’s edges as a “tax generator”, and branded the proposal a “major land and tax grab”.
The MPs fear any expansion would lead to higher costs for residents and “forced housebuilding in communities”. City mayor Sir Peter has hit back at the trio, however, saying they have “very little understanding of the issues” at play when it comes to Leicester City Council’s suggestions for local government reorganisation (LGR).
Under LGR, local leaders are expected to put forward proposals to simplify existing council structures. For areas such as Leicestershire with two tiers of governance – district councils and the county council – this would be reduced to a single tier. However, Leicester is also requesting its borders be moved outwards as part of its submission.
Speaking at a full council meeting last week, Sir Peter told councillors that council leaders from Leicestershire County Council and the district and borough councils have “acknowledged”, either publicly or privately, that the case for a larger Leicester is “overwhelming”.
City mayor Sir Peter Soulsby said the changes are a ‘once-in-a-generation opportunity'(Image: LeicestershireLive)
He added: “The only ones who are implacably opposed would seem to be the county Tory MPs, although it is very evident that most of them have little understanding of the issues and have taken great delight in portraying this as some sort of party politically motivated landgrab by me personally.”
He branded this a “wild allegation”, adding: “Just let me stress that expanding the city boundaries gives those [over the border] who are essentially part of the city community an opportunity to vote for those services that they need and already rely on. It gives those individuals the opportunity to elect the representatives that they want to serve them here in this chamber.”
Sir Peter told the chamber he considered it to be a “historical injustice” that Leicester’s borders did not expand in the 70s, when many other cities increased in size. LGR, he said, was an “opportunity” to “redress” this.
He said: “This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. It’s not perfect, but it’s a once in a generation opportunity for our city.”
However, the proposed expansion has also proved hugely unpopular with many in the communities at the edge of Leicester. More than 12,000 people have signed a petition organised by Mr O’Brien, Ms Kearns and Mr Bedford in opposition to the city’s plan. The petition has now been submitted to the council.
Following a meeting with Sir Peter to discuss their concerns, Rutland and Stamford MP Ms Kearns said: “We told the City Mayor in no uncertain terms what we think of this proposal. He would be wrong to ignore the 12,000 residents who have signed our petition – our rural way of life matters and residents deserve a Council that will represent our communities, not just see us as a tax generator.”
Mr Bedford, who represents Mid Leicestershire, added: “This move will drive up council tax and pave the way for thousands more houses. It’s obvious that resources and investment would be sucked into the city centre, leaving our communities short-changed.”
Mr O’Brien, MP for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston, said: “We have been crystal clear: Leicester’s boundaries must stay exactly as they are. The city and the county are two distinct places, and our constituents are overwhelmingly opposed to these plans – as are we.”
The three MPs have vowed to “continue the fight” against any possible expansion of Leicester.
A map of Leicester’s preferred proposed new boundaries (purple outline)(Image: Leicester City Council)
It is not just the MPs who have raised concerns about the council’s proposals, however. Liberal Democrat councillor on the city authority Nigel Porter raised concerns that the approach was a “simple trick” to make it appear that low income levels have improved in the city by taking in parts of the wealthier county.
He added he believes that the city council should instead be focusing on bringing people already in the city “out of poverty”. He said: “On the ground, there are still going to be the same people who are living in poverty.
“Leicester is still going to be bottom of the league in terms of people with the least amount of disposable income […] There will still be people in Leicester having to go to food banks every week, having to get additional support from the local council because they can’t afford to pay the bills.”
Both the Conservatives and the Greens on the authority raised concerns about a lack of “real engagement” with residents over the plan. Leader of the Conservative Group Hemant Rae Bhatia said the prospect of “forced inclusion” in the city is causing “anxiety” for those outside its borders.
He added: “Don’t make this a forced marriage.”
However, others on the council came out in support of the plan. Labour councillor Sue Barton said: “It’s actually a gain for those suburbs that come in.
“They will be able to vote and have a say on the city services that they already use, and their contribution will make them more sustainable. The only difference for most people, I think, is what name goes at the top of their council tax bill and that’s about it.
“I think we need to be giving people reassurance that there will be very little material change.”
A second proposal was also put forward for a larger Leicester – but the council has stressed this is not what it wants(Image: Leicester City Council)
Ultimately, city councillors voted to support the authority’s proposed expansion plan. This is expected to be one of three LGR proposals put to the Government this week for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.
The city and county councils are both proposing one ‘donut’ authority for Leicestershire and Rutland, with the city to remain separate, as their preferred approach. However, the county stands in opposition to the city’s bid to expand its borders, preferring the new authorities to operate on existing footprints.
Conversely, the district, borough and Rutland councils are proposing two new Leicestershire councils, split on a North-South divide. Rutland would join the northern authority, and Leicester would again remain separate and within its current boundaries under that plan.
