Yahoo News Sir Peter Soulsby and Nick Rushton call on next Government to solve funding crisis
With a General Election around the corner, we asked city mayor Sir Peter Soulsby and leader of Leicestershire County Council Nick Rushton what the local area needs from Westminster in the coming years. Both said local government funding needs to be looked at by the country’s leaders as there is not enough cash to deliver the services residents rely on.
Leicester City Council warned when it passed its budget in February that the council would likely have to file a Section 114 notice, essentially declaring itself bankrupt within 12 months, if more funding from the Government was not received. Meanwhile, the county authority has long fought for fairer funding, saying it is the worst funded county council in the country.
At its last budget, the authority was forced to dip into its reserves for the first time to balance the books, despite signing off on the highest possible rise in tax and identifying around £81 million of savings for the coming years.
READ MORE: Tell us your key issues in Leicestershire ahead of the general election
A change in Government is looking likely with Labour predicted to win a historic victory when the country goes to the polls on Thursday, July 4, while the Conservatives look set for huge losses up and down the country. Changes are also looking likely closer to home, with a number of new MPs predicted in the city and county. However, we asked the two leaders what they needed from the next Government and our next MPs regardless of who wins.
Sir Peter Soulsby
The city mayor told LeicestershireLive Leicester needs “a Government that recognises the importance of what local councils do and is committed to working with the city to deliver the services it needs”. He added the council has effectively lost £150 million worth of services each year for the last 12.
“I'm not expecting any government to repair all of that damage immediately, but I do very much hope that we'll have a government that does care about those services and does want to see them repaired as soon as possible,” Sir Peter said.
Among the most costly services for the council is social care. Sir Peter said the Government needs to recognise providing care for vulnerable adults and children “has become a major burden” and hopes action will be taken to reform the system.
He added: “The Government needs to recognise either that councils need to have the funds to provide for the ever growing need or to provide a national scheme that provides those things alongside the National Health Service.”
The city has successfully bid for pots of Government cash worth tens of millions of pounds for various local projects in recent years, including the proposed regeneration of Leicester Railway Station. While it is “always good to have funds for the city”, Sir Peter said the process “ignores local priorities”.
“It's those basic services that we need to be able to restore rather than the high profile projects that the government expects us to bid for.”
Housing is another major issue in the city. There are more than 6,000 people on the housing register, with many waiting years for a suitable home.
However, Sir Peter said, in the city, it is not so much a question of making it easier to get planning permission than it is one of there simply not being enough land to build on within Leicester’s boundaries. He added: “I very much hope that we will be encouraged to continue to work with the surrounding districts to meet needs.”
Leicester has a long tradition of voting Labour, but this year’s election has thrown up uncertainty in one area of the city in particular. Leicester East will see two former MPs, incumbent Claudia Webbe and her predecessor in the role, Keith Vaz, vying for the seat – the former as an independent and the latter for Leicester’s newest party One Leicester.
They are going up against candidates for Labour, the Conservatives, the Green Party, the Liberal Democrats and Reform UK, as well as two other independents. This means the constituency will either have a new MP or, for the first time in more than 30 year, a non-Labour representative in Parliament – or possibly both.
We asked Sir Peter what he needed from the city’s MPs going forwards. He said: “We have been in the city very fortunate that we've had MPs who have always wanted to champion the city and I very much hope that whoever's elected will want to continue to do that.”
He also raised concerns about the possible return of Mr Vaz: “The prospect of the city being represented by somebody who has been disgraced by being suspended from Parliament twice, heavily criticised for bullying and [failing] to answer difficult questions about their private life is something that the city needs to be aware of and very concerned about. Having somebody elected with that reputation, representing the city, is bad news for our reputation.”
Mr Vaz said in response: “I am not surprised that Peter Soulsby is not supporting my campaign. Our relationship has never recovered since I beat him in the contest to be the MP for Leicester East.
“He does not like being criticised for the huge mistakes that he has made over the years that have resulted in Leicester being brought to the edge of bankruptcy under him; and now he is threatening to cease funding the Diwali Lights, and break his promise to keep Leicester’s historic market open.
“People in glass houses should beware of throwing stones – when he broke Covid rules he should have resigned following that very serious offence.
“I am a bit surprised about his personal attacks. He has asked for my support on numerous occasions and I have given him huge support over the years which is a matter of public record. And when I stood down in 2019, he was my first visitor begging me to stay on in politics in Leicester.
“If elected I will speak truth to power. I will stand up for local people no matter what my critics say. The people of Leicester won’t be taken in by mud-slinging. That is what is wrong with the broken politics of this City. Unlike Peter Soulsby I have never lost an election in Leicester. I hope in this last Parliamentary campaign I will do the very best I can.”
Sir Peter Soulsby has said no decision on the future of funding for Diwali has been taken and the authority hopes it can find the necessary money through sponsorship. The council has consulted on its proposal to not return Leicester's market to its historic home, but again no decision has been announced.
Nick Rushton
The leader of the county council said what Leicestershire needs most is a fairer funding settlement from the Government. Coun Rushton said: “Obviously the main thing which we've been bleating on about for years, is treating the funding of Leicestershire fairly. It's not particularly saying to the government we need as much funding as, say, I don't know some of the really deprived areas, but we do need better funding.
“We cannot constantly be the lowest funded county council in the country. It's singularly unfair on the county council, and it's unfair on the electors of Leicestershire that they contribute just as much in their taxes, et cetera, and yet their biggest local authority is funded quite so poorly.”
The leader said the county is “constantly trying to rejig” and “ration” how it provides services. More money from the Government would mean “better services and no increase in costs” for residents, he added.
“The general electorate, are fed up with potholes, they're fed up with dirty signs, they're fed up with overgrown verges, they're fed up with no road markings, they're fed up with speeding traffic past schools,” Coun Rushton continued. “So fair funding will help bridge the gap with some of those.”
The Conservative leader also raised the problem of Leicestershire’s promised devolution deal. The county was one of the first areas to be invited to strike a devolution deal with the Government which would have seen £1 billion of investment into the area, but came with the caveat that it had to be a joint deal with the city and Rutland – and all three areas would need a mayor overseeing the deal to get the full funding, something to which the city would not agree.
Coun Rushton said: “We're in favour of devolution and devolving powers down to local people to make local decisions but we we don't want to be left behind by the so called D2N2 [group of Derby, Derbyshire, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire] that's now got itself an elected mayor.
“Whoever wins please don't leave us behind in the devolution agenda and please do focus on the devolution agenda. They all talk about it, nobody delivers it.”
The leader of the county council also spoke on planning, saying the country needs to revert back to “strategic planning” saying because the districts have responsibility for new homes, but the county is responsible for infrastructure like roads and schools, the infrastructure “doesn't necessarily follow the housing”.
He added: “We need to help people get a foot on the property ladder by building more homes. But we do need some strategic thinking about where we're going to put it and what it's going to come with.
“I'm not opposed to a housing per se. I am opposed to boxes on spine roads with no infrastructure.”
In respect of possible new MPs in the county, Coun Rushton simply said he would “work with whoever is elected” and “invite them in”, saying it was in the interest of Leicestershire residents for the council and the county’s representatives in Parliament to have a good relationship.
