Harborough District Council (HDC) is the local authority with responsibility for ‘planning’ the future of Leicestershire’s most southern area, bordering Northamptonshire, Warwickshire and Rutland. All around it, along the A6 corridor towards Oadby, from the M1 in Lutterworth, or along the A47, we are facing a sunami of housing development proposals. 

Anyone living here will tell you that the term ‘planning’ is a misnomer. The present rainbow alliance administration, led by the Liberal Democrats, supported by Reform, Labour and the Greens have not covered themselves in glory. Certainly there are valid questions about competence.

After significant delay, the Local Plan they've created is a complete dog's dinner, something independent, highly experienced and competent planners at Leicestershire County Council (LCC) have described as 'premature' and 'unsound', without any evidence or mechanisms for delivering the required infrastructure to support the plans.

The slither of green space separating Leicester City from its southern neighbours is now under serious threat of being swallowed up entirely into some huge metropolitan carpet of concrete.

What’s The Problem?

Leicester City meanwhile, with a projected population growth of 11-14% over the same period, will have an unmet housing need of some 18,700 homes – that’s almost 20,000 homes fewer than it needs.

The logic runs that this will be more than offset by the excess in Harborough and other surrounding areas, whether we like it or not but is something the Rainbow Alliance rolled over and accepted.

The infographic below shows the broader impact on infrastructure of 34,000 additional residents for Harborough District. 

It's huge. In water supply and consumption alone, we will need significant investment in new infrastructure to keep up with demand. If gas is phased out, we won't have enough electric power generation to support new homes - not unless all homes are built with solar energy panels. 

The issue isn't one of 'not in my back yard', because we do need more new homes for our growing population (7,400 more for our projected growth to 2041), it's rather 'you're completely destroying everything for everyone that's made Harborough District so special!'

The cabal has simply failed to stand up for Harborough District’s interests. In their lust for power, they thought they were giving an archer’s wave to Conservative controlled Leicestershire, local Conservative MPs and the Conservative government, in their generous interpretation of a ‘Duty to Cooperate’. The problem is the Red Knight of Leicester saw them coming and took them all prisoner.

Surrender to Leicester City

Although a Statement of Common Ground (SoCG) exists, which is a requirement to demonstrate collaboration among local authorities on strategic issues, it appears that HDC did not vigorously object to Leicester’s unmet housing needs. 

LCC planners referred to the local plan as “unsound” a term which refers to some of the justifications provided for the plan.

For example, why have certain village areas been selected over other more urban areas? Why wasn’t Leicester City pressed more heavily to demonstrate where and how it exhausted all of its urban, brown field sites – sorely in need of regeneration – before relying on surrounding districts, irrespective of what government wanted?

Harborough appears content to bulldoze its paddocks and green fields, on behalf of Leicester City – ask the residents of Great Glen, of Kibworth, Lubenham, Great Bowden, Broughton Astley and Lutterworth to name but a few settlements under threat.

It appears that HDC has unfairly and disproportionately agreed to assist Leicester City without properly considering the impact on its own lack of adequate infrastructure and services.

It’s also hard to see where it has comprehensively consulted with Leicestershire and all of the surrounding boroughs and districts,  as part of an informed consideration of the county’s strategic needs. It also fails to address the consequences for Harborough if other districts and boroughs fail to meet agreed targets.

Not just ‘premature’ but ‘unsound’ too

Under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), plans must be positively prepared, justified, effective, and consistent with national policy. So the terms “premature” and “unsound” employed by Leicestershire County Council planners take on quite a significant meaning.

County Council planners questioned the effectiveness of the plan in both identifying properly and calculating the cost of required infrastructure. Both the Highways and Education consultees barely covered their anxiety in questioning the insularity of the proposed roading and school building plans.

The criticism from LCC is even more severe when the lack of evidence supporting infrastructure delivery is considered “The plan identifies substantial growth but lacks a credible or deliverable plan to fund and phase the infrastructure to support it.”

In examination of this, much of the plan in respect of infrastucture was totally ‘premature’. The HDC plan lacked agreed infrastructure timelines and an embedded infrastructure funding statement within the overall strategic plans for the county.

It would appear that the LCC education team hadn’t really been fully consulted and therefore has not committed to any new schools in Harborough.

The HDC plan which proposed primary and secondary schools across Harborough District provided no evidence of secured funding, land strategies, or education needs.

Furthermore, with three existing secondary schools—two in Market Harborough and one in Kibworth, just four miles apart—the assumption that a new secondary school, with declining enrolment in the primary sector, is not founded on sound judgment nor is it informed by LCC’s education planning strategy.

From a Highways perspective there has been no attempt to provide evidence of adequate mitigations for the M1, A6, or A47 corridors. In reality, no detailed information of any kind was provided, but from the county’s own projections, particularly for the A6, it would  indicate complete traffic sclerosis from Market Harborough to Leicester. HDC’s mitigating response? Traffic lights.

“The plan identifies substantial growth but lacks a credible or deliverable plan to fund and phase the infrastructure to support it.”

Leicestershire County Council, Planning Team

In respect of other infrastructure, such as health and dental provision,  bearing in mind the current state of such services across the district, there was no evidence of detailed consultation with existing providers. Furthermore, there was no evidence of how clinicians and their support teams will be provided, how health facilities will be financed, or when they will be commissioned.

The Duty to Cooperate serves as a legal criterion for the plan, and once submitted, failure cannot be rectified. Consequently, the concerns raised by LCC, both formally and publicly, could potentially lead to a legal challenge. If these concerns are not addressed fully, the plan may be rejected during examination. At present, there is no evidence that the cross-border transport and education issues raised by LCC have been adequately addressed.

The critical aspect to consider is that without tangible deliverables and well-established infrastructure, planning inspectors may deem the plan ineffective and legally deficient.

It's also possible from distress beacons alight right across the district that residents might yet decide to mount a legal challenge in respect of a flawed consultation process. Some residents feel that specific areas were treated differently to others or excluded and not all residents received written information directly.

A situation of Harborough’s own making

The situation Harborough finds itself in, although exacerbated by the Labour government, cannot be attributed to the previous administration. It is a consequence of this administration’s own actions:

• Political leadership that has failed to assertively counter the demands placed on Harborough.
• A failure to openly, meaningfully, and transparently consult key stakeholders prior to submitting plans for public consultation.
• An overallocation of housing without any demographic evidence to support it.
• A lack of evidence demonstrating how the additional homes will be adequately serviced by sufficient services.
• A significant risk that the plan may not meet the NPFF test of being justified, effective, and positively prepared.
• A risk of legal challenge.

Locals must stand up and be counted

As the politicians responsible for this so-called local plan now consider feedback to it, conversations between County and HDC continue.  The gap between the ambition of HDC, or whatever it was, and the strategic interests of Leicestershire, will remain at odds.

If the revised plan fails to pass the series of tests it must withstand, or even faces a legal challenge, Harborough will face an overwhelming surge of speculative planning applications – the flow has already begun. 

Unnecessary homes will be constructed without any strategic planning, without adequate infrastructure or services provision – our roads and healthcare services will be even more severely strained than they are already. Unfortunately, objections to halt such proposals will likely be readily rejected in the current political climate, meaning that our ancient villages and medieval ridge and furrow pastures will be irreparably damaged or lost forever.

We are almost certain to face dire consequences if we proceed with the Rainbow Alliance’s local ‘plan,’ and it’s unclear what will befall us if we don’t adopt it. Hobson’s choice has become Harborough’s future and residents need to be really clear who is responsible for this mess.

If people don’t like what’s happening, they must speak up now, before it’s absolutely too late or accept the stark consequences. Even though consultation is over for the Local Plan, there are speculative plans being submitted to build on our green spaces. So please write to Harborough District Council or contact your councillor and say ‘No!’