Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 September 2025 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 35.

The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5).

There were no urgent items for consideration.

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

No declarations were made.

There were no declarations of the party whip.

The Chief Executive reported that no petitions had been received under Standing Order 36.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport on the Local Transport Plan, the purpose of which was to advise the Committee on the development of the Enabling Travel Choice Strategy (ETCS) and work undertaken to prepare three Multi-Modal Area Investment Plans (MMAIPs) pilots (Market Harborough, South Leicestershire and Hinckley areas). A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 8’ is filed with these minutes.

Arising from the discussion, the following points were made:

i)       It was noted that the LTP4 project began in 2021. Phase one had been completed and phase two was now underway. Phase three would begin following feedback received next year. Members acknowledged that the overall implementation of LTP4 would span the entire plan period up to 2040. Some phases would run in parallel, with certain long-term projects requiring several years to complete, while shorter schemes might be delivered sooner using the LTG grant funding. It was emphasised that all progress would be contingent on available funding, and that the plan included ongoing reviews to ensure the right interventions were being made.

ii)      It was highlighted that to make the recently published Transport Survey as useful as possible, Committee Members could share the survey through their social media channels to help improve engagement.

iii)    It was noted that developments closer to urban areas were more likely to be suitable for walking and cycling, while rural locations faced more challenges. The County Council had a role in influencing development sites through Local Plans, to ensure active travel was sustainable and when considering sustainable transport contributions under Section 106 developer contributions, geography being a key factor. It was also highlighted that the Authority worked with developers to find affordable, deliverable solutions that met high design standards but also suited local needs.

iv)    Officers were thanked for accommodating an informative visit to the Melton Mowbray Distributor Road for Members and were praised for the progress and expected delivery by Spring 2026.

v)     A Member highlighted the important role Fox Connect (on-demand transport service operating in Leicestershire) had in the rural areas, especially in the Belvoir Division, which covered 32 villages and 12 parishes where despite early issues, the service had been effective. The long-term security of funding for Fox Connect was queried and it was noted that current funding from the Bus Service Improvement Plan had only been confirmed for the short-term. Well-used routes could become self-sustaining as subsidies were decreased, but underused routes could be reviewed if funding declined and data would guide any future investment decisions to maintain a sustainable network.

vi)    A Member queried if the County Council was legally required to provide transport in areas where services like Fox Connect did not operate and where existing services were financially unviable. The Director reported that the Council had a duty to consider transport needs, but not to provide transport directly. Decisions around provision were based on what was reasonable for the Authority and aimed to ensure rural connectivity without guaranteeing an individual service.

vii)   A member raised concerns about limited late night bus services near the city, which now ran to 10pm instead of 11pm. It was suggested that this affected shift workers ability to use public transport and undermined carbon reduction goals. It was questioned whether pressure could be applied to Arriva or subsidies offered to improve the service. The Council was open to exploring improvements where there was sufficient demand, and the public survey was a key tool for gathering feedback to support such decisions.

viii)  A Member raised concerns about byways which were open to all forms of traffic,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport, the purpose of which was to provide the Committee with a summary of the Government’s Collection and Packaging Reforms. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 9’ is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

i)    Some Members expressed strong support for the Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) suggesting this was long overdue and would have positive impacts across Leicestershire. Members highlighted how the DRS could inspire entrepreneurial options, like those of the past bottle return practices, and create new business opportunities. A Member questioned whether the new measures would improve current recycling habits, whilst others suggested that the legislation would drive change over time and have positive impacts for the County Council by reducing waste overall.

ii)   A Member commented that the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme added financial and bureaucratic burdens on businesses which would ultimately be passed to the end consumer through increased costs. It was suggested that the introduction of these new schemes was badly timed as people and businesses were already impacted by high living costs and a struggling economy.

iii) In response to concerns raised regarding capacity, it was noted that existing local Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC) would not be used as DRS stations.

iv) The importance of public awareness campaigns was emphasised to ensure residents understood the new recycling system, especially in areas where food waste collection would be a new concept. It was noted that district councils who were responsible for waste collection had received New Burdens Funding from the Government which could help support media campaigns around the changes. Members were assured that the Committee would receive a future report in Spring 2026 on food waste collections linked to scheme roll out, which would also cover anaerobic digestion systems.

v)  Members shared their concerns about the need for clear labelling on items that would fall under DRS. It was suggested that the lack of clarity on what items should be recycled already caused confusion within households and could lead to improper recycling. Members suggested that clearer labelling would support households in identifying recyclable items better and have overall positive impacts.

RESOLVED:

That a report on the introduction of Food Waste Collections be presented to the Committee in Spring 2026.

Future meetings of the Committee are scheduled to take place on the following dates, all on a Thursday at 2.00pm, unless otherwise stated:

Thursday 22 January 2026

Thursday 5 March 2026

Thursday 4 June 2026

Thursday 3 September 2026

Thursday 5 November 2026

RESOLVED:

That meetings of the Committee in 2026 would take place at 14:00 on the following days:

Thursday 22 January 2026

Thursday 5 March 2026

Thursday 4 June 2026

Thursday 3 September 2026

Thursday 5 November 2026