Three Leicestershire districts and boroughs could be brought into city boundaries under a new vision for political reorganisation locally.  

New "base" proposals put forward by Leicester City Council would see every town and village in Blaby and Harborough districts, and in Oadby and Wigston borough, merged with Leicester. 

The authority has argued it needs an extended boundary so it can balance its books – something it is legally bound to do – and so it can build the homes it needs.  

However, the prospect of county areas being pulled into the city has proven vastly unpopular with the county's residents and political leaders who have branded it a "land grab". 



New version of city expansion proposal (Photo: LDRS)

Previous proposals for a larger Leicester as part of the Westminster-mandated shake-up of local government structures would have seen the city's boundaries extended outward in all directions.  

Among the areas being eyed up under that plan are Glenfield, Oadby, Wigston, Blaby, Whetstone, Syston, Anstey, Leicester Forest East, Birstall, Kirby Muxloe, Thurmaston and Countesthorpe. 

The city council has indicated that is still their preferred approach to the reorganisation, which is intended to simplify council structures by doing away with two-tier set-ups such as in Leicestershire where the county council and the districts and borough councils share responsibilities, and replacing them with a single-tier council.  

However, the Government has advised that, to be "legally compliant", new authorities should consider existing district areas as "building blocks", prompting the city council to put forward its new plan as an alternative. 

Under the new approach, the city, along with Harborough and Blaby districts and Oadby and Wigston borough, would form one new authority in the south of the county.  

Meanwhile, North West Leicestershire district, Charnwood, Melton, and Hinckley and Bosworth boroughs, and Rutland County would form a second new authority. 

"Strong justification" would be needed for more "complex" boundary changes, the Government has also advised. As such, the city council has not fully given up on its original proposal, with both options expected to be included in its draft submission. 

The latest plan for the city's potential expansion is proving no more popular than the last, however. Blaby District Council leader Ben Taylor has said neither plan for a larger city is "acceptable". 

The districts and boroughs have put forward their own proposal for reorganisation, which would see Leicestershire split in two, with one authority for the north of the county and Rutland, and a second for the southern areas. Under that plan, the city would remain separate and stay the same size. 

Cllr Taylor added: "I believe that our North, City, South proposal offers a more balanced and responsive model for the future of local government. It is large enough to deliver essential services and close enough to respond quickly and appropriately to the needs of our communities." 

Harborough District Council leader Phil Knowles said he "wholeheartedly reject[s] any option that includes any part of Harborough District being part of any extended city".  

He added he believes the city's approach is "too complicated" and that the district's approach "is the right thing to do for our communities first and foremost". 

Harborough, Oadby and Wigston MP Neil O'Brien also weighed in, saying: "Both options are completely unacceptable. They represent a huge land and tax grab by the City Mayor, and I am strongly opposed to them." 

Leicestershire County Council also has its own ideas for how the reorganisation should go, and is proposing one authority for Leicestershire and Rutland. The city would again remain separate and within existing boundaries. 

Leader of Leicestershire County Council, Dan Harrison, said: "I am astonished that the city council is proposing to annex vast swathes of the county – to be clear all of the districts of Harborough, Blaby and Oadby and Wigston – to justify its future viability. 

"It cannot be right that a new city council is larger than the remainder of the county. The only proposal that makes any sense on a sensible geography, retains existing boundaries, preserves services and releases the potential of over £40m annual savings, is our proposal for a new Leicestershire council including Rutland. Any other choice is high risk and high cost." 

Leader of the opposition on Leicestershire County Council Deborah Taylor slammed the city council's dual proposals as "confusing" and "concerning".