Council and councillors

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors P Browne, T Carr, S Lambert and R Payne.

There were no announcements from the Chairman.

Councillor G Waller, Leader of the Council, announced to Members that following the last meeting of Council, she had successfully raised the issue around potential improvements to the A1 through Midlands Connect and the East Midlands Transport Group. The points raised were noted by the Chief Executive of National Highways. It was likely that the improvements to the A1 would go into the National Highways proposals for their 10-year plan that would be put to government.

In accordance with the Regulations, Members are invited to declare any disclosable interests under the Code of Conduct and the nature of those interests in respect of items on this Agenda and/or indicate if Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applies to them.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive any petitions, deputations or questions received from members of the public in accordance with the provisions of Procedures Rule 25 and 26. The total time allowed for this is 30 minutes.  Petitions, deputations and questions will be dealt with in the order in which they are received and any which are not considered within the time limit shall receive a written response after the meeting.

As this is a Special Meeting of the Council any petitions, deputations or questions must relate to item on the agenda in accordance with Procedure Rule 21. The deadline for submission of deputations and questions is midday on Thursday, 6 March.

No petitions, deputations or questions had been received from Members of the public.

To receive any questions submitted from Members of the Council in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rules 27 and 28.

As this is a Special Meeting of the Council any questions must relate to item on the agenda in accordance with Procedure Rule 21. The deadline for submission is midday on Thursday, 6 March.

Six questions had been received from Members of the Council.

---o0o---

Councillor K Payne asked her question to Councillor G Waller, Leader of the Council.

In response Councillor Waller explained that she had sympathy with residents within the east of the County to gravitate towards South Kesteven and Lincolnshire given the Council’s close association with Lincolnshire and she was aware that South Kesteven were keen for Rutland to join with them; and conversations had taken place with their Leader and with the Leaders of North Kesteven and South Holland. But the Leader referenced the letter from Jim McMahon OBE MP in the 11^th February meetings papers where he had asked Rutland to work together with Leicestershire County Council, Leicester City Council and Leicestershire District Councils to develop reorganisation proposals.

A similar letter was sent to Lincolnshire District Councils, Lincolnshire County Council, North Lincolnshire Unitary Council and North East Lincolnshire Unitary Council and asked those Councils for reorganisation proposals but Rutland was not included. It was highlighted to members that Leicester City and Leicestershire County Council had not fully engaged with Leicestershire District Councils so the proposal for Members was the work undertaken by Rutland and Leicestershire District Councils and was the only proposal supported by evidence.

The Leader highlighted to Members that the Council had to operate within the legal framework summarised in the legal implications section of the report to Special Council on 11^th February 2025. There was currently no decision for Council to take but the meeting played an important role for Members as a further opportunity to express their opinions.

In response to a supplementary question, Councillor Waller set out that the 21^st March 2025 was a checkpoint for Government. The real proposals were not expected until November and between those two dates, the proposals would be worked up. It was explained that information and data was still required from the respective County Councils, so the Leader did not anticipate any real options until after the County Council elections in May. The Leader confirmed that any information that was made available in the meantime would be made available to share with the public.

---o0o---

Councillor K Corby asked his question to Councillor G Waller, Leader of the Council.

In response Councillor Waller set out that the Government had made it clear that it wanted all parts of the UK to be within a Mayoral Combined Authority Area. The Leader highlighted that other Councils across the Midlands already had combined authorities or plans for these in place. This then left Leicestershire, Leicester City and Rutland in the East Midlands not in any combined authority arrangements. That was the basis on which the Government had asked the Council to discuss such an arrangement with Leicester City and Leicestershire and it was the governments expectation that Rutland would form a combined authority with the two Leicestershire upper tier Councils.

The Leader highlighted that her predecessors had had discussions with Leicester City and Leicestershire about forming a combined  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To receive Report No. 17/2025 from the Leader of the Council.

Report No. 17/2025 was introduced by Councillor G Waller, Leader of the Council, the report was a continuation of the report to Special Council on 11th February 2025. It was explained the Leader, Chief Executive, Strategic Directors and other relevant officers had continued to work with Leicestershire’s district and borough councils to formulate a proposal for a reorganised local government structure which would be big enough to deliver, while small enough to connect with the people it served; and would represent a positive change for residents, businesses and communities.

Some members raised concerns on the benefits of the proposed three-authority model for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland and were concerned this would not make local government more local, accessible and accountable for residents. Members wished to see those benefits for Rutland with any proposal the council would be potentially going with and whether the proposals would be the best for Rutland residents. It was set out that other options with neighbours would have been beneficial with members given a vote on those options. It was expressed that all options should be considered and the government challenged on their requirements for boundaries to match health, police and fire areas and if the council lost, then at least it had tried.

It was also set out by some members that the council should work realistically within the parameters set by government. Support was also expressed for the Leader’s approach to negotiations with neighbouring authorities as she was considered to have the necessary grasp of the detail in the fast-changing environment of local government reorganisation discussions.

RESOLVED

That Council:

a)    NOTED that the interim plan to be submitted by the seven Leicestershire district and borough councils and Rutland County Council by the 21 March deadline was the emerging preferred model and this would be subject to further work between 21 March 2025 and the deadline for submission of final proposals on 28th November 2025

b)    NOTED the indicative timeline for local government reorganisation and Government consultation.

c)     NOTED that the decision on local government reorganisation was a matter for the Secretary of State.

d)    NOTED that Government would be responsible for making the necessary legislative arrangements to preserve Rutland’s ceremonial arrangements, including its Lord Lieutenant and High Sherriff.

Thursday, 27 March 2025.

This was confirmed to be Thursday, 27 March 2025.