Nine Members of Rutland Council Support Local Government Reorganisation Option: North, City, South Proposal, Amid Political Opposition, Videos of Councillors Speaking Phoenix eggs and the Berlin wall
Nine Members of Rutland Council Support Local Government Reorganisation Option: North, City, South Proposal, Amid Political Opposition
Rutland County Council is moving closer to settling its preferred future structure, with half of non-Cabinet members supporting the North, City, South (NCS) Proposal for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR). The recommendation will now pass to the Council's Cabinet, which is due to make the final decision today, Friday, November 21, 2025, led by Council Leader Cllr Gale Waller at 2.00 pm.
The NCS model proposes the creation of three unitary councils across the wider geographic area, a major step away from the current two-tier system of local government.
During last night's meeting, a vote was held among non-Cabinet councillors to express their preference for LGR options. The result highlighted a split among backbench members:
Nine members voted in favour of Option One: North, City, South Proposal.
Nine members chose not to express a preference.
The strong support for the NCS model among those who voted for an option provides a none legally binding recommendation to the Cabinet for the decision that will be forwarded to the government minister.
The North, City, South model, which the Council has invested significant time and resources into developing, is detailed across several key areas:
1. Single Tier of Local Government & Sensible Geography
The proposal would see the creation of three unitary councils based on existing district boundaries.
Avoiding city boundary expansion and respecting local identities.
Clear separation between local delivery and a future Mayoral Strategic Authority (MSA), reducing strategic overlap.
Strength: Balanced populations (around 400k each); avoids a 'mega-council'; clear strategic/delivery split.
Weakness: Complexity of transition; requires strong programme management.
2. Right Size for Efficiency and Resilience
Financial modelling suggests the three-council structure is of an optimal scale, projecting £44.3 million in annual savings and long-term sustainability through reinvestment in prevention and housing.
Strength: Strong financial case; credible evidence signed off by all s151 officers.
Weakness: Requires harmonisation of pay and council tax; risk of diseconomies if governance is weak.
3. High-Quality and Sustainable Public Services
The plan incorporates a prevention-focused model, with an investment of £27m annually in neighbourhood teams by Year 10, forecast to deliver £91m in avoided costs.
Strength: Strong prevention model; evidence-based approach; supports long-term demand management.
Weakness: Disaggregation of county services adds complexity; risk of service inconsistency during transition.
Community and Identity Commitments
Rutland County Council say the proposal has strong public support, with engagement showing 61% backing from over 6,000 residents. It explicitly commits to retaining the ceremonial counties of Leicestershire and Rutland and preserving civic roles, safeguarding historic identities. Neighbourhood governance is central, aiming to empower local decision-making at the community level (c. 50k population), though this would involve a reduction in councillor numbers from 384 to 196.
Political Fallout and Opposition
The Council's recommendation was quickly met with criticism from Alicia Kearns MP, who posted on social media immediately after the meeting, expressing her "disappointment" and "significant concerns" about the process.
Conservative Group's Alternative Motion
Alicia Kearns highlighted that the Rutland Conservative Group was denied the opportunity to table an alternative motion at the meeting. This motion would have formally expressed the Council's:
Opposition to the "flawed, rushed and disruptive" LGR process.
Regret that options to protect Rutland as a standalone Council or to merge with South Kesteven were not developed or under consideration.
Concerns over the impact on residents, services, democratic representation, and local investment.
MP's Critique of the Process
In an accompanying video, Ms Kearns further claimed that it was "not true" that the Council could not have put forward its own proposal to the government, citing options like staying standalone or merging with South Kesteven. She stated that the lack of commitment from Rutland had put the South Kesteven bid at risk. She described the Council's decision to deny the Conservative Group's motion as "very, very concerning in the terms of democratic deficit", arguing it prevented the discussion of issues Rutlanders overwhelmingly wanted addressed.
The Cabinet decision today is therefore set against a backdrop of deep political division and strong local opposition to the current process and the specific options being considered.
Special, Cabinet - Friday, 21st November, 2025 2.00 pm
https://rutlandcounty.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=133&MId=3108
The Vote:
No councillor supported the Leicester City or Leicestershire County Council options.
Nine councillors: Linda Chatfield (LibDem), Mark Chatfield (LibDem), Stephen Lambert (LibDem), Ray Payne (LibDem), Abigail West (LibDem), Steve McRob ((L), Ramsay Ross (L), Andrew Bown (Ind) and Kevin Corby (Ind) all supported Rutland being merged with North Leicestershire.
Cllrs: Karen Payne (C), Giles Clifton (C), David Wilby (C), Matthew Farina (C), Kiloran Heckels (C), Lucy Stephenson (C), Nick Begy (Ind), Oliver Helmsley (Ind) & Tracey Carr (Ind) all decided not to support any of the three options presented.
%201934%20-%202025.%20Oakham,%20Rutland.%20former%20Oakham%20Mayor.jpg)
%201934%20-%202025.%20Oakham,%20Rutland..jpg)
