Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Strategy and Transformation
Decision status: Recommendations approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
To confirm the continued involvement of the Council in the partnerships based on an informed view of their added value and achievements.
Matter for
Decision
The Officer’s report provided an update on
the key external partnerships the Council was involved with as part of a
commitment given in the Council’s “Principles of Partnership Working”.
Decision of
Executive Councillor for Strategy and Transformation
i. To continue to work with the Greater
Cambridge Partnership and other growth-related partnerships and to work with
the new model of delivery for the Local Enterprise Partnership under the Combined
Authority, so that together we can address the strategic issues affecting
Cambridge, to the overall benefit of citizens.
ii. To
continue to work within the Cambridge Community Safety Partnership to fulfill
our obligations to help reduce crime and anti-social behaviour in the city.
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Head of Corporate Strategy.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Referred to p108 of the officer’s report and asked
whether the Housing Development Agency was truly a creature of the Greater
Cambridge Partnership and how the Leader saw this going forward given that the
views of Cambridgeshire County Council and South Cambridgeshire District
Council diverged.
ii.
It was understood that the Housing Development
Agency was intended to be self-financing and questioned whether the City
Council would have to pay in the future for its services.
iii.
Commented that it would be interesting to see how
the Greater Cambridge Partnership would relate to the Combined Authority in
relation to skills.
iv.
Made reference to the digital wayfinding project in
paragraph 5.9 and the City Access package in paragraph 5.12 of the officer’s
report.
v.
Asked whether the Cambridge Community Safety
Partnership was involved in the Police restructure in the City.
The Strategic Director said the following in response to Members’
questions:
i.
Cambridgeshire County Council had taken the
decision to transfer its assets into its own development company but they may
require the expertise of the Housing Development Agency to deal with more
complex issues.
ii.
South Cambridgeshire District Council had taken services
back in house but they may also require the Housing Development Agency’s
expertise on complex sites.
The Executive Councillor for Strategy and Transformation said the
following in response to Members’ questions:
i. The Housing Development Agency was created before the devolution
arrangements.
ii. The Combined Authority was a commissioning body so it may be able to
lead on some of the projects.
iii. The City Council wanted to get the best out of the Housing Development
Agency and he believed that it would be self-financing as it could also win
projects from other people in the future.
iv. The fact that the Greater Cambridge Partnership focussed on skills was
important.
v. Confirmed that he had been consulted in advance about the restructure of
the policing in the City and across the force area.
vi. Confirmed that his focus for policing would be to maintain neighbourhood
policing and he would lobby for resources to continue to be focussed in the
city.
The Committee
endorsed the recommendations by 4 votes to 0:
The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any
Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Publication date: 29/06/2018
Date of decision: 19/03/2018