Agenda and minutes

A webcast of the meeting can be viewed at Committee meetings at Leicestershire County Council - YouTube

Armistice

 

The County Council marked Armistice Day with a service and two minute silence on Tuesday 11^th November. The short and dignified service was very moving, and the Chairman thanked Leanne Plummer for playing the Last Post and Reveille so competently. He was also pleased to see that County Hall was illuminated in red for the duration of the Royal British Legion’s Poppy Appeal. He thanked those Members who were able to attend local services on Remembrance Sunday and lay a County Council wreath.

 

On 6^th November at Bosworth Battlefield, the Chairman unveiled over 3,200 hand knitted poppies which had been hand crafted in schools, homes, community groups and libraries. It looked fantastic.

 

King’s Award for Voluntary Service

 

The Chairman was pleased to inform Members that four local voluntary organisations had been awarded the King’s Award for Voluntary Service. The announcement was made on 14^th November to mark the King’s birthday.

 

The King’s Award for Voluntary Service held the same value as an MBE and acknowledged the remarkable efforts of volunteer groups in their communities.

 

The winning organisations were:

 

• Asfordby Amateurs Ladies, Girls and Inclusive Football Club, based in Melton. The club provided a welcoming and safe environment for all abilities and ages to develop their skills through football, setting their community up for future success.

 

• Bright Hope in Swannington. The charity was committed to serving the community by providing a range of free and accessible support including adult social care, counselling, wellbeing support services, and a community café in a purpose-built day centre.

 

• Heather Scarecrow Festival, a week-long annual scarecrow festival open to residents, businesses, and schools in Heather to raise funds to support local groups that serve the village. The festival provided creative activities, social cohesion, and financial support to the local community.

 

• There was also a winner in Leicester City. Shama Women’s Centre, based in Leicester, was recognised for the work they do in supporting women to gain independence through education, training, counselling, and peer support.

 

Members joined the Chairman in congratulating all the organisations for their award.

 

 

John Sinnott

 

John Sinnott was retiring from the County Council after today’s meeting, marking the end of an era in local government leadership.  He was appointed Chief Executive in 1994 and was the longest serving chief executive in the country.  During this time, he had overseen significant organisational change, managed numerous financial challenges and ensured the council maintained strong performance and stability.

 

John successfully led the Council through the last local government reorganisation in 1997.  Following a number of years of no overall control, he played a critical role in brokering discussions that led to the first joint administration following reorganisation.  He implemented a wide range of important corporate improvements which led to the Council being named ‘Council of the Year’ in the 2009 Local Government Chronicle Awards, as well as achieving the highest rating of ‘4 star, improving strongly’ when national council rating systems were in place. 

 

John had been at the helm for many notable achievements for the county including the reinterment of King Richard III, the 2012 Olympic Torch Relay, and the council’s trio of Impower awards which recognised value for money. As the Clerk to the Lord Lieutenant, he coordinated efforts to pay local tributes to the late Queen.

 

John demonstrated strong leadership through the Covid pandemic which put a great strain on the county and tested councils up and down the country. John’s calm approach steered the County Council through that difficult time.

 

Under John’s leadership, the Council had earnt a reputation as one of the highest-performing councils in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

It was moved by the Chairman, seconded by Mr Hamilton-Gray and carried:

 

“That the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 24^th September 2025, copies of which have been circulated to members, be taken as read, confirmed and signed.”

 

It was moved by the Chairman, seconded by Mr Hamilton-Gray, and carried:

 

“That the minutes of the Extraordinary meeting of the Council held on 12^th November 2025, copies of which have been circulated to members, be taken as read, confirmed and signed.”

 

The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to make declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.

 

No declarations were made.

 

(A)         Mrs Page asked the following question of the Leader or his nominee:

 

“Could the Council please confirm what measures and policies are in place to ensure effective, timely communication to members and how compliance to communication is measured?”

Mr D Harrison replied as follows:

“Mrs Page will recall the all member briefing on customer services and dealing with divisional issues which took place on Thursday 5 June and addressed a number of the issues set out in her question.  I would remind her of the following information which was provided during that briefing:

 

• Where members have queries relating to Environment and Transport matters, there is a dedicated email address for members to contact the Customer Service Centre (CSC).  The CSC will acknowledge the email within one working day and log the issue onto the system which will be assigned to the relevant team in the Environment and Transport Department. Once your issue is logged, you will receive a unique reference number. The Environment and Transport Department will provide updates and progress reports.

 

• For all other queries, please contact democracy@leics.gov.uk.  You will receive an acknowledgement within one working day and response to your query within 10 working days, although sometimes the response may indicate that further work is needed.  If you are not happy with the response you have received then it will be escalated to the appropriate Chief Officer and a further response will be received within 10 working days.

 

In terms of general communication to members, the weekly Member Digest is circulated on a Tuesday.  This includes the latest Council news, information worth noting, details of upcoming meetings and all member briefings and provides links to the Council’s events and have your say pages.

There is also a WhatsApp group for members where County Council news is shared.  This is publicly available information which members can then share in their own WhatsApp group.”

 

(B)         Mrs Taylor asked the following question of the Leader or his nominee:

 

“‘During the Full Council meeting on the 24^th of September, the Lead Member for Children and Families said:

 

“She {Deborah Taylor} also mentioned the fact that schools are underfunded which is why I find it quite bizarre, I’ll even say hypocritical Mr Chairman, that the previous Lead Member will stand here and say to the Full Council that schools are underfunded when roughly about this time last year her administration chose to move just under £3m, I think it was £2.8m away from the schools funding block into the high needs block to deal with a deficit which all of us have said here is not something we could fix as a local authority. So, I think championing that schools should have more funding, that there’s an issue in schooling, at the same time as taking away £2.8m valuable money to a lot of schools, is something we should all remember.”

 

The day before this meeting, on the 23^rd of September, the Children and Family Services Department launched a consultation to pursue the same 0.5% transfer from the School Block to the High Needs Block for the 2026/27 financial year, with the stated intention of continuing the SEND Investment Fund. Can I, therefore, ask the Lead Member when he made those comments at Full Council:

 

1.            Does he believe schools in Leicestershire are underfunded?

 

2.            Did he know at the time he spoke at Full Council that his department had launched the consultation on transferring money from the Schools Block to the High Needs Block the day before?

 

3.            Did the Lead Member pre-judge the outcome of this consultation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

The Leader gave a position statement on the following matters:

 

·       Member Conduct;

·       Local Government Reorganisation;

·       Building Local and Regional Strategic Relationships;

·       Villages Together.

 

The Lead Member for Resources gave a position statement on the Efficiency Review.

 

The Lead Member for Environment and Transport gave a position statement on the following matters:

 

·       Getting ready for winter (gritting and flood ready);

·       Response to Storm Claudia.

 

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Commission gave a position statement on the work of the Scrutiny Commission.

 

A copy of the position statements is filed with these minutes.

 

 

It was moved by Mr Fowler, seconded by Mr D Harrison, and carried unanimously:

 

“That the Annual Delivery Report and Performance Compendium 2025 be approved.”

 

It was moved by Mr D Harrison, seconded by Mrs Taylor and carried unanimously:

 

Motion 1

 

“(a)     That the proposed changes to the Constitution, as set out in Appendix A to this report, other than those which relate to Standing Orders (the Meeting Procedure Rules), be approved;

 

Motion 2 – Procedural Motion in accordance with Standing Order 37

 

(b)           That the changes to Standing Orders (The Meeting Procedure Rules), as set out in Appendix B to this report, be approved.”

 

(NOTE: Standing Order 37 requires that this procedural motion, having been moved and seconded, stands adjourned until the next ordinary meeting of the Council.)

 

It was moved by Mr D Harrison, seconded by Mrs Taylor and carried unanimously:

 

“(a)     That Jane Moore be appointed Chief Executive and Head of Paid Service with effect from 4 December 2025, with remuneration at Grade 22, spinal column point 71, of the Leicestershire County Council Salary Scale 2025-26;

 

(b)           That Jane Moore be appointed as Electoral Registration Officer and Returning Officer with effect from 4 December 2025.”

 

(a)  That this Council:

 

(i)               Recognises the vital role played by carers in supporting vulnerable individuals across Leicestershire and acknowledges the unique challenges they face in accessing services, employment, and community participation;

(ii)              Notes that the Care Act 2014 grants carers the right to:

·     A Carer’s Assessment, regardless of the amount or type of care provided;

·     Support services and personal budgets where eligible;

·     Information, advice and preventative support to maintain wellbeing;

·     Independent advocacy where needed.

 

(iii)    Notes that the Children and Families Act 2014 entitles all young carers and parent carers to a needs assessment;

 

(b)  That this Council therefore resolves to:

 

(i)           Formally recognise carers as a group requiring particular consideration and support, specifically:

 

·         To ensure carers are consulted and involved in shaping services;

·         To review service delivery to remove barriers for carers;

 

(i)           Assess future decisions, services and policies made and adopted by the Council to determine the impact of changes on carers;

 

(ii)         Ensure that these commitments are incorporated into the refresh of the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Carers Strategy and any other relevant policies and strategies.

It was moved by Mr D Harrison, seconded by Mr Crook and carried unanimously:

 

“(a)     That this Council:

 

(i)             Recognises the vital role played by carers in supporting vulnerable individuals across Leicestershire and acknowledges the unique challenges they face in accessing services, employment, and community participation;

(ii)            Notes that the Care Act 2014 grants carers the right to:

·     A Carer’s Assessment, regardless of the amount or type of care provided;

·     Support services and personal budgets where eligible;

·     Information, advice and preventative support to maintain wellbeing;

·     Independent advocacy where needed.

 

(iii)      Notes that the Children and Families Act 2014 entitles all young carers and parent carers to a needs assessment;

 

(b)           That this Council therefore resolves to:

 

(i)             Formally recognise carers as a group requiring particular consideration and support, specifically:

 

·     To ensure carers are consulted and involved in shaping services;

·     To review service delivery to remove barriers for carers;

 

(ii)        Assess future decisions, services and policies made and adopted by the Council to determine the impact of changes on carers;

 

(iii)       Ensure that these commitments are incorporated into the refresh of the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Carers Strategy and any other relevant policies and strategies.”

 

 

(a)      That this Council notes the recent announcement by Keir Starmer’s Labour Government of plans to introduce a mandatory Digital ID scheme for all UK residents.

(b)      That this Council further notes that the Government’s plan:

 

(i)        Could require every resident to obtain a Digital ID to access public services and entitlements;

 

(ii)       Could risk criminalising millions of people, particularly older people, those on lower incomes, or those without access to digital technology;

 

(iii)      Raises significant privacy and civil liberties concerns;

 

(iv)      Could result in billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money being wasted on a massive IT project, with no clear benefit or safeguards.

 

(c)       That this Council believes that Labour’s scheme:

 

(i)    Represents an expensive measure that will undermine public trust;

 

(ii)  Will do nothing to address the real priorities facing communities such as delivering more police on the streets, properly funding local schools and fixing broken roads and pavements;

 

(iii) Fails to protect our core British values of liberty, privacy and fairness.

 

(d)      That this Council welcomes the Liberal Democrats’ consistent national opposition to Labour’s ID cards, having previously defeated Labour’s original plans for ID cards in 2010, and opposes Labour’s renewed attempt to impose them in digital form.

 

(e)      That this Council resolves:

(i)       To formally oppose the Labour Government’s Digital ID plans;

(ii)      To request the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive write to the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Minister for Digital Infrastructure expressing this Council’s firm opposition to Labour’s mandatory Digital ID system and calling for the plans to be scrapped;

(iii)     To work with local voluntary, digital inclusion and civil liberties groups to ensure that no resident in Leicestershire is penalised or excluded as a result of any national identification scheme.

 

It was moved by Mr Mullaney and seconded by Mr Fowler:

 

“(a)     That this Council notes the recent announcement by Keir Starmer’s Labour Government of plans to introduce a mandatory Digital ID scheme for all UK residents.

(b)           That this Council further notes that the Government’s plan:

 

(i)             Could require every resident to obtain a Digital ID to access public services and entitlements;

 

(ii)           Could risk criminalising millions of people, particularly older people, those on lower incomes, or those without access to digital technology;

 

(iii)          Raises significant privacy and civil liberties concerns;

 

(iv)          Could result in billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money being wasted on a massive IT project, with no clear benefit or safeguards.

 

(c)           That this Council believes that Labour’s scheme:

 

(i)             Represents an expensive measure that will undermine public trust;

 

(ii)           Will do nothing to address the real priorities facing communities such as delivering more police on the streets, properly funding local schools and fixing broken roads and pavements;

 

(iii)          Fails to protect our core British values of liberty, privacy and fairness.

 

(d)           That this Council welcomes the Liberal Democrats’ consistent national opposition to Labour’s ID cards, having previously defeated Labour’s original plans for ID cards in 2010, and opposes Labour’s renewed attempt to impose them in digital form.

 

(e)           That this Council resolves:

(i)             To formally oppose the Labour Government’s Digital ID plans;

(ii)           To request the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive write to the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Minister for Digital Infrastructure expressing this Council’s firm opposition to Labour’s mandatory Digital ID system and calling for the plans to be scrapped;

(iii)          To work with local voluntary, digital inclusion and civil liberties groups to ensure that no resident in Leicestershire is penalised or excluded as a result of any national identification scheme.”

 

On the motion being put and before the vote was taken, five members rose asking that a named vote be recorded. 

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For the Motion

 

Mr Abbott, Mr Bailey, Dr Bloxham, Mr Boam, Mr Bools, Mrs Bottomley, Mr Bradshaw, Mr Bray, Miss Butler, Mr Chapman, Mr Cooke, Mr Crook, Mrs Danks, Mr Durrani, Mr England, Mr Fowler, Mr Galton, Mr Grimley, Mr Hamilton-Gray, Mr D Harrison, Mr P Harrison, Dr Hill, Mr Holt, Mr Innes, Mr King, Mrs Knight, Mr Lovegrove, Mr McDonald, Mr Melen, Mr Morris, Mr Mullaney, Mr O’Shea, Mr Page, Mrs Page, Mrs Pendlebury, Mr Piper, Mr Poland, Mr Pugsley, Mr Richichi, Mr Robinson, Mr Rudkin, Mrs Seaton, Mr Smith, Mr Squires, Mrs Taylor, Mr Tilbury, Mr Walker, Mr Whitford

 

Against the Motion

 

Ms Gray, Mr Miah

 

Abstention

 

Mr Charlesworth

 

The motion was carried with 48 members voting for the motion and 2 members voting against.

 

(a)  That this Council notes:

 

(i)    The increasing number of children and young people in our county with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND);

 

(ii)  The growing pressure on schools, local authorities, and families to meet complex needs with limited resources;

 

(iii) That current funding levels for SEND provision are insufficient to meet statutory obligations and ensure equitable access to education.

 

(b)  That this Council believes:

 

(i)    Every child deserves access to high-quality education, regardless of their needs;

 

(ii)  Underfunding SEND services risks long-term harm to children’s development, wellbeing, and life chances;

 

(iii) Local authorities must be adequately resourced to deliver the support required under the Children and Families Act 2014.

 

(c)  That this Council resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Education, urging an immediate review and uplift of SEND funding allocations for Leicestershire County Council.

 

It was moved by Mrs Taylor, seconded by Mr Smith and carried unanimously:

 

“(a)     That this Council notes:

 

(i)    The increasing number of children and young people in our county with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND);

 

(ii)   The growing pressure on schools, local authorities, and families to meet complex needs with limited resources;

 

(iii) That current funding levels for SEND provision are insufficient to meet statutory obligations and ensure equitable access to education.

 

(b)           That this Council believes:

 

(i)    Every child deserves access to high-quality education, regardless of their needs;

 

(ii)   Underfunding SEND services risks long-term harm to children’s development, wellbeing, and life chances;

 

(iii) Local authorities must be adequately resourced to deliver the support required under the Children and Families Act 2014.

 

(c)           That this Council resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Education, urging an immediate review and uplift of SEND funding allocations for Leicestershire County Council.”

 

(a)  This Council notes:

 

(i)    That instances of surface water and fluvial flooding across Leicestershire are becoming more frequent and severe, posing risks to life, property, and transport networks.

 

(ii)  That road closures during flood events may at times be delayed because the Council’s Operational Highways teams and emergency services cannot always attend immediately.

 

(iii) That Nottinghamshire County Council operates a Community Flood Signage Scheme (CFSS), which enables trained community Flood Wardens (who are employees of Nottinghamshire County Council) to deploy signage and temporarily close roads when pre-agreed flood trigger levels are reached, under the direction and authorisation of the County Council’s Flood Risk Management Team.

 

(iv) That this scheme has been recognised nationally for improving public safety, reducing emergency response demands, and strengthening local resilience.

 

(b)  This Council has undertaken an initial feasibility assessment introducing a CFSS and recognises:

 

(i)    That empowering local communities to act swiftly and safely during flooding events could significantly enhance public safety.

 

(ii)  That subject to resolving legal and regulatory issues and with appropriate training, insurance, and operational protocols, community Flood Wardens could responsibly assist the Council in closing roads that are temporarily impassable due to flooding.

 

(iii) That implementing a CFSS in Leicestershire would align with the Council’s objectives as the Lead Local Flood Authority and demonstrate proactive flood management.

 

(c)  To introduce such a scheme this Council notes:

 

(i)    That Volunteer Flood Wardens (VFWs) are currently managed by the Local Authority Resilience Partnership. The Resilience Partnership Management Board does not support the introduction of CFSS due to concerns over resource pressures, particularly during a severe weather event.

 

(ii)  In light of the Resilience Partnership Management Board’s position, the management responsibility of the CFSS would need to be transferred to the Council from the Resilience Partnership in order to facilitate the scheme, including updating the role and responsibilities of the team providing the necessary training, supervision and oversight to effectively manage the responsibility and liabilities associated with a volunteer scheme of this nature.

 

(iii) That a transfer of responsibilities and appointing the necessary resource would need to be managed to avoid disruption to services during the higher flooding risk time of year for the County Council’s flood risk and drainage teams.

 

(iv) That implementation of the CFSS would be dependent on both the ability and willingness of VFWs to take on additional responsibilities and for those VFWs to be available at the time of a flood event. In addition, it may not be that VFWs are operating in the areas most at risk of safety or property impacts.

 

(v)  Not all locations would be suitable for action by VFW, including high speed roads and isolated locations. These locations would continue to be addressed by the Local Highway Authority even where a CFSS was implemented.

 

(d)  This Council therefore resolves to:

 

(i)    Introduce a pilot scheme of enhanced resources allocated to prioritise ‘quick response’ to locations where road closures could reduce the risk to life (in addition to existing sites) and risk of property flooding caused by bow waves or other relevant locations promoted by VFWs. Initial locations during the pilot would be based on existing reports and local knowledge. Additional locations may be added over time dependent on the evaluation of the pilot. The objectives are similar to a CFSS but with the benefits of wider coverage and consistent application.

 

(ii)  Work with VFWs to identify suitable locations for signage warning where a route is liable to flooding or where bow waves can cause internal property flooding.

 

(iii) Engage with the communities impacted by bow wave flooding to help and guide  ...  view the full agenda text for item 48d