The impact of Reform UK on Leicestershire County Council

drafted 2026-07-06 · accepted

← all councils · home

This council: flagship · Adult Social Care · Asylum and Migration · Children's services and safeguarding · Climate · Council Spending and Efficiency · Devolution and local government reorganisation · Heritage · Housing, planning and local plans · Outsourcing of public services · Renaming and rebranding · Roads, highways and potholes · SEND and home-to-school transport · Support for (or hostility to) women · Waste, recycling and bins

Reform UK has led Leicestershire County Council since May 2025 (source).

Leicestershire County Council is run by a Reform UK administration led by D Harrison.[1] The administration says it inherited a £90m budget gap and commissioned a root-and-branch efficiency review of council spending, income and procurement.[2] In July 2025 the Cabinet re-prioritised the council's Net Zero Action Plan, reallocating a £2m carbon-reduction reserve to flooding and severe-weather adaptation.[3] In June 2025 the Cabinet revoked the previous cross-party flag-flying protocol and adopted a new one restricting County Hall's flagpoles.[4]

Climate and net zero

Re-prioritising the Net Zero Action Plan

On 15 July 2025 the Cabinet approved a key decision to re-prioritise the council's Net Zero Action Plans, at the request of the Leader.[3] It reallocated the £2m earmarked carbon-reduction reserve to flooding mitigation and severe-weather adaptation.[3] The decision changed the focus of the plan away from carbon reduction towards climate adaptation and projects delivering financial savings.[3] Members commented that if investment continued to be made in Net Zero it would be difficult to see the impact on the climate.[3]

Spending and efficiency

DOGE, then an external consultant

In July 2025 Leader D Harrison told full council that Reform UK's DOGE unit had offered to assist councils with a Reform UK minority administration and that he had invited DOGE to Leicestershire for an initial discussion.[5] He said commissioning any review would be a Cabinet decision rather than something the visit itself would constitute.[5] The administration decided instead to appoint a paid external consultant, Newton Consulting Ltd, to carry out its Efficiency Review.[6] The Leader said Leicestershire had not been officially invited by Reform UK to conduct a DOGE audit.[6] On 28 October 2025 the Cabinet resolved to award the Efficiency Review contract to the winning tenderer following a competitive procurement.[7]

The Efficiency Review and the Better Leicestershire Programme

The Leader said the administration commissioned the root-and-branch efficiency review because of a £90m budget gap.[2] The review set an overall savings target of £102.6m: £33.4m originally built into the budget, raised to £44m by officers, plus up to £60m identified with the consultants.[2] On 26 May 2026 the Cabinet took a key decision approving the review's outcomes and renaming the Transformation Programme the 'Better Leicestershire Programme'.[8] The programme aimed to close a budget gap of £85m by 2029/30.[8] The savings were to be pursued through organisational design, a review of management structures and a reduction in agency use, with no separate figure isolated for the agency-use strand.[8] The same decision approved up to £20m from reserves to fund the programme's net implementation costs.[9] The Leader said the review was expected to deliver payback within around three years.[10]

The 2026/27 budget

On 18 February 2026 full council adopted the Medium Term Financial Strategy for 2026/27 to 2029/30, setting a net revenue budget for 2026/27 of £616.1m.[11] The budget was carried by 39 votes to none, with 13 abstentions.[11]

Flags and culture war

Revoking the cross-party flag protocol

On 12 June 2025 the Cabinet resolved, as a key decision, to revoke the flag-flying protocol previously agreed by all political group leaders.[4] It adopted a new protocol restricting the two front County Hall flagpoles to the Union Flag and the County Flag, with the third pole for the St George's or Lord Lieutenant's flag.[4] Decisions on all other flag requests were delegated to the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader.[4]

Call-in and reaffirmation

The Overview and Scrutiny Commission called in the decision and on 24 June 2025 asked the Cabinet to reconsider parts of it, by 7 votes to 6.[12] The commission cited a lack of staff consultation and a lack of clarity on delegated flag decisions.[12] At a special meeting on 3 July 2025 the Cabinet confirmed that the 12 June decision stands in all other respects, other than clarifying the Union Flag's default use on the Quadrangle pole.[13] Staff network representatives told the call-in hearing that under the new protocol flags would no longer be used unless agreed by the Leader, citing the recently acquired Disability Pride Month flag.[14]

Adult social care

The care precept

Full Council approved a council tax rise of 2.99% for 2026/27 on 18 February 2026, carried 39 votes to none with 13 abstentions.[15] The minutes record no separately identified adult social care precept element within that figure.[15] Cabinet had recommended the rise on 3 February 2026, framing it explicitly against inflation rather than against the separate adult social care precept flexibility.[16]

Provider fees

The council Leader told full Council on 3 December 2025 that a review of home care procurement fees, carried out with Reform UK members and the adult social care team, targeted at least £1m of savings against contracts agreed by the previous administration.[17] The review indicates downward renegotiation of provider fee arrangements rather than a straight inflationary uplift.[17]

Charging

Officers told scrutiny on 19 January 2026 that Leicestershire already charges the maximum permitted in law for adult social care, with service user contributions higher than the national average and no plan to exceed national charging guidance for 2026/27.[18] The council charges for residential care as a statutory requirement and applies the maximum discretionary charge for domiciliary care, set through the standard financial assessment.[19]

Children's services

Leicestershire's Medium Term Financial Strategy Monitoring Report for 2025/26, reported to the Scrutiny Commission on 11 March 2026, recorded that demand-led budget pressure in children's social care continued to be driven by residential placement pressures and a rise in looked-after children earlier in the year.[20] The council's overall financial forecast nonetheless improved over the year, from an expected £2.9m overspend to a £700,000 underspend.[20] A Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee discussion of the MTFS on 20 January 2026 attributed the rise in children coming into care, and in residential placement costs, to a national shortage of foster carers and limited availability of family-based placements.[20]

SEND and home-to-school transport

Leicestershire's Scrutiny Commission considered a proposal to develop independent travel training on 11 May 2026.[21] It was confirmed as a voluntary two-year trial aimed at a small group of young people with less complex needs, with participants able to return to supported transport.[21] No change to transport eligibility or charging was recorded.[21]

Roads and highways

Pothole pressure and the national backlog

Leicestershire's Highways and Transport Overview and Scrutiny Committee, reviewing performance to June 2025, discussed the national road maintenance backlog, noting an estimated £17bn total budget was needed to address it across England, in the context of the council's own deteriorating road condition and reduced real-terms government funding.[22] By March 2026, Leicestershire's Highways, Transport and Waste Overview and Scrutiny Committee recorded that pothole reports had more than tripled against the previous winter's peak month, with only temporary repairs able to keep pace.[23]

Additional highways funding, July 2025

In July 2025 Leicestershire's Cabinet approved reallocating highways capital funding from the Advanced Design Programme to the North and East Melton Mowbray Distributor Road.[24] Cabinet also noted an additional £22m of highways and transport funding awarded to the council since the February 2025 Medium Term Financial Strategy, including the Department for Transport's additional highways maintenance grant.[24]

The February 2026 budget: potholes and footpaths

At Leicestershire's budget-setting Full Council on 18 February 2026, an opposition amendment to add £3m to the 2026/27 footpath maintenance budget, explicitly to reduce the backlog of reported defects, was defeated 23 votes to 19, with 10 abstentions.[25] The same Full Council also rejected a £50,000 2026/27 investment in automated pothole-detection technology, moved as part of the same defeated amendment, so no dedicated increase to a carriageway or pothole-resurfacing budget line was carried for 2026/27.[26] Full Council instead unanimously adopted a smaller amendment adding £300,000 for 2026/27 'additional environmental maintenance', including £160,000 of additional footpath maintenance funded from the Service Investment Fund; the amendment carried 52 votes to none and was folded into the substantive 2026/27-2029/30 budget, which carried 39 votes to none with 13 abstentions.[27]

Devolution and reorganisation

Leicestershire's May 2025 elections went ahead, and the Reform-led council has taken no decision to postpone elections.[28] An amendment on local government reorganisation, carried by Full Council on 2 July 2025 by 35 votes to 13, put on record that it was the previous administration which had requested an election delay to join the fast-track LGR programme, a request the Government refused.[28]

Housing and planning

Housing targets

Leicestershire County Council has not recorded a motion or resolution formally objecting to the government's mandatory standard-method housing targets.[29] Its only substantive engagement with the standard method in the sampled minutes is Cabinet's response of 26 May 2026 to Oadby and Wigston Borough Council's Regulation 19 Local Plan consultation and its declared unmet housing need, in which the County Council required OWBC to justify to the Planning Inspectorate why it could not meet its housing need figure as calculated by the national standard method, treating that figure as the baseline rather than objecting to it.[29]

The Minerals and Waste Local Plan

The council's own statutory Local Plan, the Minerals and Waste Local Plan, has not been paused, withdrawn or delayed since May 2025.[30] On 28 April 2026 Cabinet gave in-principle approval to prepare a new joint Minerals and Waste Local Plan with Leicester City Council and Rutland County Council, on the grounds that a new government plan-making system requires the council to start preparing a new plan before the end of 2026.[30]

Support for women

Leicestershire's Cabinet approved a twelve-week public consultation on a draft Domestic Abuse Reduction Strategy 2026-2029 on 24 March 2026, with the recorded reasons for decision citing the council's statutory duty under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 to support victims and survivors in safe accommodation.[31] This was a strategy-consultation decision, not itself a recorded decision to commission, recommission, reduce or decommission safe-accommodation funding.[31] Leicestershire's Scrutiny Commission, on 22 April 2026, recorded members questioning the availability of safe accommodation for domestic abuse victims and noting a current shortfall.[32] Officers attributed the shortfall to the wider lack of housing supply across the region, and the Commission resolved only to note the update and pass comments to Cabinet, with no recorded decision to commission, recommission, reduce or decommission safe-accommodation funding.[32]

Cabinet's gender composition

Cabinet minutes of 26 May 2026, the first Cabinet meeting following Mr Dan Harrison's appointment as Leader at Annual Council on 13 May 2026, recorded nine members with the honorific 'Mr.' present or in attendance.[33] One member, Dr J. Bloxham, was recorded with a title that does not itself indicate gender, and a further member recorded as an apology, A. Tilbury, also carried 'Mr.'[33]

Renaming and rebranding

The Better Leicestershire Programme

On 26 May 2026 Leicestershire's Cabinet approved the revised Transformation Programme and resolved that it be 're-named the Better Leicestershire Programme'.[34] The Chairman, Mr D. Harrison CC, told the meeting this was to help tackle the budget deficit and maximise efficiency while protecting services, and that the renamed programme would also complement the council's planning for local government reorganisation.[34] The recorded reasons for decision describe it as intended to help close the council's £85m Medium Term Financial Plan gap by 2029/30.[34]

The environment scrutiny committee

Leicestershire's environment scrutiny committee is recorded under two different names either side of a constitutional review: the 'Environment and Climate Change Overview and Scrutiny Committee' as late as 10 September 2025, and the 'Environment, Flooding and Climate Change Overview and Scrutiny Committee' from 11 November 2025 onwards.[35] In between, Full Council on 24 September 2025 unanimously carried a Constitution Committee motion approving changes to the terms of reference of the council's Overview and Scrutiny Committees.[35]

The environment and transport director's title

Between Cabinet meetings on 28 April 2026 and 26 May 2026, the departmental director title used in Cabinet minutes changed from 'Director of Environment and Transport' to 'Director of Growth, Environment and Transport'.[36] No specific decision or rationale for the change is recorded in the sampled minutes.[36]

References

1. Leicestershire County Council (Reform-led administration, Leader D Harrison) has not cut its Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) or zero-emission bus commitments: in a written answer to Full Council, Cabinet member Mr Tilbury said the council had commissioned a feasibility study into bus franchising and had used BSIP grant funding over the prior 12 months to review and re-design 80% of the county's bus network, expanding demand-responsive services rather than scaling delivery back.
“we have utilised the Bus Service Improvement Plan grant funding to review and re-design 80% of the County’s bus network resulting in enhanced service provision.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“We have recently commissioned an initial feasibility study into the suitability of bus franchising for Leicestershire.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
2. At the 11 May 2026 Scrutiny Commission, the Leader said the Administration had commissioned this 'root and branch' efficiency review (via Newton, not DOGE) of Council spending, income and procurement because of a £90m budget gap, and that it had built an overall savings target of £102.6 million (£33.4m originally budgeted, raised to £44m, plus a further £60m identified by the external consultants).
“the new administration had inherited a significant budget gap of £90 million and had therefore decided to commission a root and branch efficiency review of Council spending, income and procurement.” Minutes, 11 May 2026 ↗
“The Leader outlined that savings of £33.4 million had originally been built into the budget, which had been increased to £44 million through work with officers, and that external consultants had worked with the Council to identify further potential savings of up to £60 million, contributing to an overall target of £102.6 million.” Minutes, 11 May 2026 ↗
3. On 15 July 2025 Leicestershire County Council's Cabinet, on a report of the Director of Environment and Transport and at the request of the Leader of the Council, approved a 'Proposal to Re-prioritise Net Zero Action Plans' (a KEY DECISION): it reallocated the £2m earmarked carbon-reduction reserve to flooding mitigation and severe-weather adaptation, and changed the focus of the Net Zero Action Plan away from carbon reduction to climate adaptation, projects delivering financial savings, and other benefits — members commenting that if investment continued to be made in Net Zero it would be difficult to see the impact on the climate.
“The Leader of the Council has requested the opportunity to reconsider the allocation of the earmarked reserve and change in focus of activity under the Net Zero Action Plan.” Minutes, 15 July 2025 ↗
“the reallocation of the £2m carbon reduction reserve and to change the focus of the activities delivered under the Net Zero Action Plan, as requested by the Leader of the Council” Minutes, 15 July 2025 ↗
“That support be given to a change of focus in the activities delivered under the Net Zero Action Plan from carbon reduction to:” Minutes, 15 July 2025 ↗
“if investment continued to be made in Net Zero, it would be difficult to see the impact that this would have on the climate” Minutes, 15 July 2025 ↗
4. Leicestershire County Council's Cabinet, meeting 12 June 2025, resolved (Key Decision) to revoke the flag-flying protocol previously agreed by all political Group Leaders and adopt a new protocol restricting the two front County Hall flagpoles to the Union Flag and County Flag, the third front pole to the St George's flag or the Lord Lieutenant's flag, and delegating decisions on all other flag requests (community/celebration events) to the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader.
“That the current flag flying protocol agreed by the political Group Leaders in the last council term be revoked” Decisions, 24 June 2025 ↗
“the Union Flag and the County Flag to fly permanently from two of the three poles at the front of County Hall” Decisions, 24 June 2025 ↗
5. In July 2025 full-council question time, Leader D. Harrison said Reform UK's DOGE unit had offered to assist Reform-minority-controlled councils and that he had invited DOGE to Leicestershire for an initial discussion, but stated that formally commissioning any review would be a Cabinet decision, not something DOGE's visit itself would constitute.
“It has since become clear that DOGE has offered to assist councils with a Reform UK minority administration and I recently said to the Opposition Group Leaders that I have invited DOGE here for an initial discussion, although the commissioning of a review would be a matter for decision by the Cabinet, a key decision.” Minutes, 2 July 2025 ↗
6. In a written answer at the 3 December 2025 County Council meeting, the Leader confirmed DOGE had been invited to the County Council for discussion at the 8 September 2025 Scrutiny Commission, but that the Administration decided instead to appoint a paid external consultant (Newton Consulting Ltd) to carry out the Efficiency Review, and stated Leicestershire had not been officially invited by Reform UK to conduct a DOGE audit.
“I confirmed they had been invited to the County Council. However, I also said at that same meeting I felt the appointment of an external consultant would be the best approach to address the high level of savings that the County Council was required to deliver. This is what the Administration ultimately decided to approve.” Minutes, 3 December 2025 ↗
“Not officially. However, Reform UK has said that it expected all councils it controls to be invited to conduct an audit. This is not the case in Leicestershire.” Minutes, 3 December 2025 ↗
“Newton was appointed on that basis and after an open procurement process to carry out the Efficiency Review.” Minutes, 3 December 2025 ↗
7. Cabinet formally resolved on 28 October 2025 to award the Efficiency Review contract to the winning tenderer following a competitive procurement process (Newton Consulting Ltd), rather than taking up the DOGE offer.
“The Cabinet considered an exempt report of the Director of Corporate Resources which provided an update on the outcome of the procurement process to commission an external efficiency review and sought approval to award to the most advantageous tender following the completion of the evaluation process.” Minutes, 28 October 2025 ↗
“That approval be given to award to the most advantageous tender, as outlined at paragraph 27 of the report;” Minutes, 28 October 2025 ↗
8. On 26 May 2026 Leicestershire County Council's Cabinet took a Key Decision approving the outcomes of its Efficiency Review and re-naming the revised Transformation Programme the 'Better Leicestershire Programme', targeting overall savings of £102.6m (built from an original £33.4m, raised to £44m, plus up to £60m identified with the help of external consultants Newton) to close an £85m budget gap by 2029/30; as explained to the Scrutiny Commission on 11 May 2026 ahead of that Cabinet decision, the savings would be pursued through a mix of organisational design, management-structure review, 'reduction in agency use', and wider efficiency measures — with no separate £ figure isolated for the agency-use strand alone.
“That the revised Transformation Programme at Appendix A to the report be approved and re-named the Better Leicestershire Programme;” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
“make progress towards closing the current gap of £85m by 2029/30.” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
“external consultants had worked with the Council to identify further potential savings of up to £60 million, contributing to an overall target of £102.6 million.” Minutes, 11 May 2026 ↗
“the savings would instead be pursued through a combination of organisational design, review of management structures, reduction in agency use, and wider efficiency and effectiveness measures.” Minutes, 11 May 2026 ↗
9. The same 26 May 2026 Cabinet Key Decision approved up to £20m of investment (funded from reserves) to cover the net implementation costs of the Better Leicestershire Programme, and required further progress reports back to Cabinet and Scrutiny — this is the formal decision authorising the savings programme within which agency-use reduction sits, but the minutes record no discrete £ or % target specific to consultancy or agency/interim-staff spend, and no cap or Transparency Code reporting change for that spend was recorded.
“That up to £20m of investment to fund the net implementation costs required to deliver the Better Leicestershire Programme be approved;” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
“g) That further reports be made to the Cabinet and the Scrutiny Commission later in the year. (KEY DECISION)” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
10. Leicestershire's Council-owned Efficiency Review (delivered with consultants Newton Consulting Ltd) is a named savings programme tied to the MTFS: the Leader told Scrutiny Commission on 11 May 2026 that £33.4m of savings originally built into the budget had been increased to £44m by officer work, with external consultants identifying further potential savings of up to £60m, giving an overall headline target of £102.6 million, expected to deliver payback within around three years.
“The Leader outlined that savings of £33.4 million had originally been built into the budget, which had been increased to £44 million through work with officers, and that external consultants had worked with the Council to identify further potential savings of up to £60 million, contributing to an overall target of £102.6 million.” Minutes, 11 May 2026 ↗
“the independent review had produced a rolling programme of action expected to deliver payback within around three years, target £60 million of savings” Minutes, 11 May 2026 ↗
11. Leicestershire County Council formally adopted the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2026/27-2029/30 at Full Council on 18 February 2026 (motion moved by Mr Fowler, seconded by Mr Harrison), setting a net revenue budget for 2026/27 of £616.1 million incorporating the growth and savings for that year set out in Appendix C; the substantive motion was carried 39 for, 0 against, with 13 abstentions.
“It was moved by Mr Fowler and seconded by Mr Harrison” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“approval be given to the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) which incorporates the recommended net revenue budget for 2026/27 totalling £616.1m as set out in the revised Appendices A, B and E of this report and includes the growth and savings for that year as set out in the revised Appendix C” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“The substantive motion was carried, with 39 members voting for the motion and 13 members abstaining.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
12. The new flag protocol was called in by the Overview & Scrutiny Commission; at its meeting on 24 June 2025 the Commission resolved, on a motion moved by Mrs Taylor and seconded by Mr Poland, by 7 votes to 6, to ask Cabinet to reconsider parts of the 12 June decision, citing lack of staff consultation and a lack of clarity on delegated flag decisions.
“It was moved by Mrs Tayor and seconded by Mr Poland that:” Minutes, 24 June 2025 ↗
“That the Cabinet be asked to reconsider its decision regarding the adoption of a new Protocol for Flying Flags at County Hall taken at its meeting held on 12 June 2025” Minutes, 24 June 2025 ↗
“The Motion was put and carried, 7 Members voting for the motion, and 6 members voting against.” Minutes, 24 June 2025 ↗
13. At a special meeting on 3 July 2025 Cabinet reconsidered the call-in and, other than clarifying that the Union Flag defaults on the Quadrangle pole when no designated-day flag is flying (other flags there restricted to exceptional national/international events determined by the Chief Executive with the Leader), confirmed that the 12 June 2025 decision to introduce the restrictive Protocol for Flying Flags at County Hall stands in all other respects -- i.e. the restrictive protocol was reaffirmed and adopted.
“the decision of the Cabinet at its meeting on 12 th June 2025 to introduce a new Protocol for Flying Flags at County Hall stands” Minutes, 15 July 2025 ↗
“The Union Flag will be flown from this flag pole at all times when another specific flag is not being flown.” Minutes, 3 July 2025 ↗
“The flying of other specific flags from the fourth flag pole will be restricted to a recognition of exceptional national or international events which may arise” Minutes, 3 July 2025 ↗
14. Council staff network representatives told the Scrutiny Commission call-in hearing (24 June 2025) that under the new protocol flags would no longer be used unless agreed by the Leader, citing the Disability Pride Month flag -- recently acquired by the Council -- as an example of a flag that would no longer be routinely flown.
“Considering the flags will now not be used unless agreed by the Leader - for example, the Disability Pride Month flag which has not long been acquired” Minutes, 8 September 2025 ↗
15. Full Council resolved on 18 February 2026, on a motion moved by Mr Fowler and seconded by Mr Harrison, to approve a Council Tax increase of 2.99% for 2026/27 and the resulting precept, carried 39 votes to none with 13 abstentions; the minutes do not record a separately identified adult social care precept element within that 2.99% figure.
“(h) That the recommended Council Tax increase of 2.99% for 2026/27 and the resulting precept be approved;” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“It was moved by Mr Fowler and seconded by Mr Harrison:” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“The substantive motion was carried, with 39 members voting for the motion and 13 members abstaining.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
16. Cabinet on 3 February 2026 recommended the 2026/27 Council Tax increase of 2.99%, framed explicitly against inflation rather than against the separate adult social care precept flexibility.
“the proposals sought to reduce the budget gap whilst keeping the Council Tax increase below inflation” Minutes, 24 March 2026 ↗
“That a Council Tax increase for 2026/27 of 2.99% be recommended;” Minutes, 24 March 2026 ↗
17. The County Council Leader told full Council on 3 December 2025 that a review of home care procurement fees, carried out with Reform UK members and the Adult Social Care team, targeted at least 1 million pounds of savings against contracts agreed by the previous administration, indicating downward renegotiation of provider fee arrangements rather than a straight inflationary uplift.
“following a review of home care procurement fees, working with Reform UK Members and the Adult Social Care team at least £1m of savings is targeted to the contracts agreed by the previous Administration” Minutes, 3 December 2025 ↗
18. At the Adults and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee (19 January 2026), members were told that Leicestershire already charges the maximum permitted in law for adult social care and that service user contributions are already higher than the national average, with no plan to exceed national charging guidance for 2026/27.
“The Director explained that the Council already charge d the maximum permitted in law, leaving little scope to increase income.” Minutes, 28 January 2026 ↗
“Members noted that service user contributions in Leicestershire were higher than the national average and asked whether further increases were planned.” Minutes, 28 January 2026 ↗
19. The Director confirmed the council charges for residential care (a statutory requirement) and has chosen to apply the maximum discretionary charge for domiciliary care too, with charges set through the standard financial assessment against income and assets.
“The Director explained that under the social care charging policy, councils were required to charge for residential care, while ch arging for domiciliary care was discretionary, and the Council had chosen to charge the maximum allowed.” Minutes, 28 January 2026 ↗
20. Leicestershire County Council's Medium Term Financial Strategy Monitoring Report for 2025/26 (period 10, reported to the Scrutiny Commission on 11 March 2026) recorded that demand-led budget pressure in children's social care was continuing to be driven by residential placement pressures and a sharp rise in looked-after children earlier in the year, even as the council's overall forecast position improved from an expected £2.9m overspend to a £700,000 underspend. A Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee discussion of the MTFS on 20 January 2026 recorded that the rise in children coming into care and in residential placement costs was attributed to a national shortage of foster carers and limited availability of family-based placements.
“An underspend of £700,000 had now been forecast compared to an expected £2.9m overspend at period 6.” Minutes, 11 March 2026 ↗
“For children’s social care, residential placement pressures and a sharp rise in looked -after children earlier in the year continued to be an issue.” Minutes, 11 March 2026 ↗
“The Director acknowledged that the number of children coming into care had increased, alongside rising residential costs driven largely by a national shortage of foster carers and limited availability of suitable family -based placements.” Minutes, 20 January 2026 ↗
21. A proposal to develop independent travel training, considered by Leicestershire's Scrutiny Commission on 11 May 2026, was confirmed as a voluntary two-year trial aimed at a small group of young people with less complex needs, with participants able to return to supported transport; no change to transport eligibility or charging was recorded.
“The Director of Growth, Environment and Transport confirmed that the scheme would be voluntary and delivered only with the support of families and schools, and that it would be aimed at a relatively small group of young people with less complex needs, representing a limited proportion of the overall cohort” Minutes, 11 May 2026 ↗
22. Leicestershire's Highways and Transport Overview and Scrutiny Committee discussed the national road maintenance backlog when reviewing performance to June 2025, recording that an estimated £17bn total budget was needed to address the backlog across England, in the context of the council's own deteriorating road condition and reduced real-terms government funding.
“It was noted that to address the backlog in maintenance work across England, a total budget of £17bn had been estimated” Document, 6 November 2025 ↗
23. Leicestershire's Highways, Transport and Waste Overview and Scrutiny Committee recorded that pothole reports had more than tripled against the previous winter's peak month, with only temporary repairs able to keep pace, when it considered the 2026/27 Highways and Transportation Capital Programme in March 2026.
“It was highlighted that pothole reports had risen to more than three times the previous winter’s highest monthly volume.” Minutes, 5 March 2026 ↗
24. In July 2025 Leicestershire's Cabinet approved reallocating highways capital funding from the Advanced Design Programme to the North and East Melton Mowbray Distributor Road, and noted an additional £22m of highways and transport funding awarded to the council since the February 2025 Medium Term Financial Strategy, including the Department for Transport's additional highways maintenance grant.
“An update was also provided on the additional £22m highways and transport related funding awarded to the County Council since the current Medium Term Financial Strategy was approved by the Council in February 2025.” Minutes, 15 July 2025 ↗
“Reallocation of funding from the advanced design programme to the North and East Melton Mowbray Distributor Road (NEMMDR)” Minutes, 15 July 2025 ↗
“the Department for Transport’s additional maintenance grant” Minutes, 15 July 2025 ↗
25. At Leicestershire's budget-setting Full Council on 18 February 2026, an opposition amendment (moved by Mrs Taylor, seconded by Mr King) to add £3m to the 2026/27 footpath maintenance budget, explicitly to reduce the backlog of reported defects, was defeated 23 votes to 19, with 10 abstentions.
“Reduced backlog of reported defects, improving safety and accessibility for all users, including older residents and those with mobility impairments.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“A £3 million investment provides a substantial uplift that will deliver noticeable improvements countywide.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“The proposal set out in Table F was not carried, with 19 members voting for the amendment and 23 voting against.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
26. The same Full Council also rejected a £50,000 2026/27 investment in automated pothole-detection technology (moved as part of the same defeated amendment), so no dedicated increase to a carriageway/pothole resurfacing budget line was carried for 2026/27; only the modest footpath top-up above passed.
“Table C – Investment in Innovative Technology for Road Maintenance (Automated Road Inspection)” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“The proposal set out in Table C was not carried, with 18 members voting for the amendment and 24 voting against.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
27. The same Full Council instead unanimously adopted a smaller amendment adding £300,000 for 2026/27 'additional environmental maintenance', including £160,000 of additional footpath maintenance funded from the Service Investment Fund; the amendment carried 52-0 and was folded into the substantive 2026/27-2029/30 budget, which carried 39 votes to none with 13 abstentions.
“£160,000 additional footpath maintenance for 2 -years” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“The amendment was carried, with 52 members voting for the amendment and no members voting against.” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
“The substantive motion was carried, with 39 members voting for the motion” Minutes, 18 February 2026 ↗
28. Leicestershire's May 2025 elections went ahead and the Reform-led council has taken no decision to postpone elections. An amendment on local government reorganisation moved by Mr D Harrison and seconded by Mr Boam at Full Council on 2 July 2025, carried by 35 votes to 13, put on record that it was the previous administration which had requested an election delay to join the fast-track LGR programme, a request the Government refused.
“The amendment was put and carried, with 35 members voting for the amendment and 13 members voting against.” Minutes, 2 July 2025 ↗
“the County Council under the previous administration changed its position when the Government refused a request to delay elections to join the fast-track LGR programme to unlock devolution.” Minutes, 2 July 2025 ↗
29. Leicestershire County Council has not recorded a motion or resolution formally objecting to the government's mandatory standard-method housing targets. The only substantive engagement with the standard method in its minutes is Cabinet's response of 26 May 2026 to Oadby and Wigston Borough Council's own Regulation 19 Local Plan consultation and its declared unmet housing need, in which the County Council required OWBC to justify to the Planning Inspectorate why it could not meet its housing need figure as calculated by the national standard method, treating that figure as the baseline rather than objecting to it.
“the OWBC will need to demonstrate that there is a substantive evidence base to justify its conclusion that OWBC is unable to meet its LHN as calculated by the national standard method, based solely on highway reasons” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
“regarding Oadby and Wigston Borough Council’s Local Plan and setting out the proposed responses to the Borough Council’s Regulation 19 consultation and its declared unmet housing need” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
30. Leicestershire County Council's own statutory Local Plan, the Minerals and Waste Local Plan, has not been paused, withdrawn or delayed since May 2025. On 28 April 2026 Cabinet gave in-principle approval to prepare a new joint Minerals and Waste Local Plan with Leicester City Council and Rutland County Council, moved by Mr Harrison CC and seconded by Mr Crook CC, who flagged concerns about the tight timetable; the reason given was that a new government plan-making system requires the Council to start preparing a new plan before the end of 2026.
“seeking in -principle approval for the Council to work with Leicester City and Rutland County Councils to prepare a joint Minerals and Waste Local Plan (M&WLP) across the three authority areas” Minutes, 28 April 2026 ↗
“In seconding the motion, Mr. Crook CC referred to concerns relating to the three Councils’ different political and strategic priorities and the challenging timetable for production of the M&WLP” Minutes, 28 April 2026 ↗
“The Government has introduced a new plan -making system which requires the County Council to start preparing a new M&WLP before the end of 2026” Minutes, 28 April 2026 ↗
31. Leicestershire's Cabinet, on 24 March 2026, approved a twelve-week public consultation on a draft Domestic Abuse Reduction Strategy 2026-2029, with the recorded reasons for decision citing the Council's statutory duty under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 to support victims and survivors in safe accommodation; this is a strategy-consultation decision, not itself a recorded decision to commission, recommission, reduce or decommission safe-accommodation funding.
“The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Children and Family Services which sought approval to undertake a public and stakeholder consultation on the Leicestershire Domestic Abuse Reduction Strategy 2026 -29.” Minutes, 24 March 2026 ↗
“Consultation is required to ensure the Council is meeting its statutory duties under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, including responsibilities relating to support for victims and survivors in safe accommodation.” Minutes, 24 March 2026 ↗
32. Leicestershire's Scrutiny Commission, on 22 April 2026, recorded that members questioned the availability of safe accommodation for domestic abuse victims, noting a current shortfall attributed by officers to the wider lack of housing supply; the Commission resolved only to note the update and pass comments to Cabinet, with no recorded decision to commission, recommission, reduce or decommission safe-accommodation funding.
“members questioned the availability of ‘safe accommodation’ of which there was currently a shortfall. The Director advised that the primary constraint was the wider lack of housing supply across the region.” Minutes, 22 April 2026 ↗
33. Leicestershire's Cabinet minutes of 26 May 2026 (the first Cabinet meeting following the 13 May 2026 Annual Council meeting at which Mr Dan Harrison was appointed Leader) record nine members with the honorific 'Mr.' present or in attendance (D. Harrison in the Chair, C. Abbott, K. Crook, H. Fowler, A. Hamilton-Gray, P. Harrison, C. Pugsley, M. Squires, and A. Innes CC in attendance) and one member, Dr. J. Bloxham, whose title in the minutes does not itself indicate gender; a further member recorded as an apology, A. Tilbury, also carries 'Mr.'
“PRESENT Mr. D. Harrison CC (in the Chair) Mr. C. Abbott CC Dr. J. Bloxham CC Mr. K. Crook CC Mr. H. Fowler CC Mr. A. Hamilton-Gray CC Mr. P. Harrison CC Mr. C. Pugsley CC Mr. M. Squires CC In attendance Mr. A. Innes CC Apologies Mr. A. Tilbury CC” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
34. On 26 May 2026 Leicestershire County Council's Cabinet approved the revised Transformation Programme and resolved that it be 're-named the Better Leicestershire Programme'; the Chairman, Mr D. Harrison CC, told the meeting this was to help tackle the budget deficit and maximise efficiency while protecting services, and that the renamed programme would also complement the Council's planning for local government reorganisation. The reasons for decision record it as intended to help close the Council's £85m Medium Term Financial Plan gap by 2029/30.
“REASONS FOR DECISION: The revised Transformation Programme - the Better Leicestershire Programme - and delivery of the newly identified savings will support the Council in maintaining a sustainable Medium Term Financial Plan and make progress towards closing the current gap of £85m by 2029/30.” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
“That the revised Transformation Programme at Appendix A to the report be approved and re-named the Better Leicestershire Programme;” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
“The Chairman, Mr. D. Harrison CC, referred to the need to tackle the budget deficit and maximise efficiency whilst protecting services, and noted that the Better Leicestershire Programme would also complement the Council’s planning for local government reorganisation (LGR).” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗
35. Leicestershire County Council's environment scrutiny committee is recorded under two different names either side of a constitutional review: minutes name it the 'Environment and Climate Change Overview and Scrutiny Committee' as late as 10 September 2025, and the 'Environment, Flooding and Climate Change Overview and Scrutiny Committee' from 11 November 2025 onwards. In between, Full Council on 24 September 2025 unanimously carried a Constitution Committee motion, moved by Mr D. Harrison and seconded by Mrs Taylor, approving 'the proposed changes to the terms of reference of the Council's Overview and Scrutiny Committees'.
“Minutes of a meeting of the Environment and Climate Change Overview and Scrutiny Committee held at County Hall, Glenfield on Wednesday, 10 September 2025.” Minutes, 11 November 2025 ↗
“Minutes of a meeting of the Environment, Flooding and Climate Change Overview and Scrutiny Committee held at County Hall, Glenfield on Tuesday, 11 November 2025.” Minutes, 11 November 2025 ↗
“It was moved by Mr D. Harrison, seconded by Mrs Taylor and carried unanimously: “That the proposed changes to the terms of reference of the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committees, as set out in the Appendix to this report, and any consequential amendments to the Constitution required as a result of these changes, be approved.”” Minutes, 24 September 2025 ↗
36. Renaming #3 (post title, own administration): between Cabinet meetings on 28 April 2026 and 26 May 2026, the departmental director title used in Cabinet minutes changed from 'Director of Environment and Transport' to 'Director of Growth, Environment and Transport'; no specific decision or rationale for the change is recorded in the sampled minutes.
“The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport regarding” Minutes, 28 April 2026 ↗
“The Cabinet considered a joint report of the Director of Growth, Environment and Transport and the Director of Children and Family Services” Minutes, 26 May 2026 ↗