Agenda item

The Commission considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources, the purpose of which was to seek the views of the commission on the Councils draft Strategic Plan (2027-2031) as part of the consultation.  A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 8’ is filed with these notes.

In introduction the report the Mr Dan Harrison CC, the Leader of the Council, commented that the draft Strategic Plan for 2027–2031 set out the Council’s vision, outcomes and priorities for a Better Leicestershire. It aimed to build a strong and resilient county where people and communities thrived and public money delivered maximum value. Against a backdrop of rising demand, local government change and forthcoming reorganisation, the Plan provided a stable foundation for maintaining efficient, responsive and well-governed services while preparing for the future. The Leader welcomed the Commission’s views that would inform the consultation and help shape the final Plan before consideration by the Cabinet and Full Council.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

(i)               Concern was raised about the relevance and deliverability of the Plan in the context of Local Government Reorganisation (LGR).  The County Council would cease to exist on 1 April 2028 and its resources, estate and responsibilities transferred to two new unitary authorities that might have different priorities. It was suggested that the Council’s immediate focus should be on maintaining safe and operational services through the transition.

(ii)              It was noted that as the County Council would continue to exist until 1 April 2028 it still required a robust strategic framework to guide its services and secure value for money.  The Plan would provide this as well as support a safe transition to the new authority.  The new unitary authorities would not be bound by the Plan and would inherit plans from several councils.  However, maintaining strong services would place them in the best possible position for the future. The Leader commented that it was necessary to establish a vision despite uncertainty regarding LGR.

(iii)            No decisions had been made about the allocation of assets or services between the new authorities, although both would collectively need to continue the local government services currently delivered across Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland.

(iv)            Members emphasised the need to protect business-as-usual services while resources were also directed to LGR. Officers advised that funding had been allocated to support transition, but this would not be sufficient to meet all costs. Resource requirements were therefore being discussed jointly across the ten local authorities.

(v)             It was noted that the Chief Executive had been appointed Senior Responsible Officer for LGR across the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland area. It was acknowledged that continuing services, developing efficiencies and creating two new unitary authorities simultaneously would be a significant undertaking for all involved.

(vi)            Members asked how success would be measured under the Plan given that no baselines, timescales and measurable targets had been included.  Officers explained that the Plan had been mapped to the Local Government Outcomes Framework and that a strategic implementation plan containing KPIs would be developed. Existing departmental scrutiny performance reports would be aligned with the Strategic Plan outcomes, as would the Annual Delivery Plan considered by the Commission each November, enabling ongoing monitoring through scrutiny and internal management arrangements.

(vii)          Members welcomed the document’s presentation and clear statement of intent but suggested that this could be more accurately described as a strategic ‘vision’ rather than a complete ‘plan’.  The Director agreed to consider how the document was described.

(viii)         A Member suggested that the Strategic Plan provided an opportunity for the current Council to set out by way of a brief statement of intent, its priorities for consideration by the successor authorities. The Chief Executive cautioned against prescribing a County Council model but agreed to consider how its vision for the delivery of those services it currently provided such as children’s and adults’ social care and highways and how this could be articulated without unduly constraining the future authorities.

(ix)            Some Members expressed concern that the natural environment was not sufficiently prominent, noting the rural character of the county and the importance residents placed on farmland, parkland and the natural environment.  Members were reassured that environmental measures would be included through the national outcome’s framework and within the detailed delivery plan being developed. The Leader highlighted the Council’s management of 62 farms, its tree-planting programme and its stewardship of parkland and confirmed that environmental work remained a priority.

(x)             Members questioned whether the four headline themes would be sufficiently clear and meaningful to residents, who might see only the summary rather than read the whole document. In particular, the distinction between a “better Leicestershire for residents” and a “better Leicestershire for communities” was considered unclear. Suggestions included using simpler headings based on people, places, the economy and the Council, and explaining more directly how and why services would improve. The Director undertook to review the one-page summary and supporting descriptions so that the intended outcomes could be more clearly be understood immediately without the need to additional text.

(xi)            It was questioned whether the Plan reflected the Government’s stated ambitions to “rewire” local government and increase the provision of council and affordable housing.  The Chief Executive explained that housing delivery was currently a district council function, although the Plan supported the conditions necessary for economic growth. It was noted that the Plan focused on the County Council’s responsibilities to 2028, while housing and wider devolved functions would need to be addressed through district council local plans, LGR and the proposed mayoral strategic authority.

RESOLVED:

That the comments now made on the Council’s draft Strategic Plan 2027 – 2031 be presented to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting in November.