Issue - meetings

Matter for Decision

The report referred to an update on progress to establish Greater Cambridge Impact (GCI) and made a recommendation to the Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources to enable the Council’s investment in GCI to be included in 25/26 General Fund Budget.

 

The Chair welcomed Sara Allen, Executive Director of Greater Cambridge Impact to the meeting.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources

The Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources agreed the following:

      i.         Noted progress made with securing equity and loan finance and developing the pipeline of projects for first investment during the second half of 2025.

    ii.         Requested that a single investment of £0.8m to the Greater Cambridge Impact is included in the 2025/26 General Fund

   iii.         Budget to be recommended to Full Council (noting these funds were agreed ‘in principle’ by full Council on 20th July 2023 subject to progress towards funding commitments of £5m from other parties)

  iv.         Requested that drawdown is delegated to the Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources, following consultation with Chair and Opposition Spokes,  following reassurance from the Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer in consultation with  that governance arrangements are in place and due diligence is completed.

    v.         Requested approval of the nomination of the Chief Executive as the Council’s representative on the Greater Cambridge Impact Company Board.

 

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 Economic Development Manager.

 

In response to Members’ questions the Economic Development Manager and Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources said the following:

      i.         The report was setting out the basis for the availability of funding in the 2025/25 budget.

    ii.         To trigger the drawn down was to reach the first close of £5 million then the first viable investment could be made. The Council’s funds would not be used until that point had been triggered. Therefore, was asking for the funds to be made available but would be drawn down when the first close was reached.

   iii.         Fundraising would continue as the final close was a target of £10million.

  iv.         There were two substantial investors who were ready to commit but wanted to see the Council’s own commitment. There needed to be mutual confidence building at this point in the process.

    v.         Projects planned would provide interventions that prevented poverty and expensive public expenditure.

  vi.         The Committee should be confident that the GCI was being managed by extremely skilled individuals with enough assurances there was undue risk to the Council.

 vii.         This was a one-off investment from the Council. Future investors would see that there was £5million in the fund.

viii.         This was the moment for maximum confidence building to take the scheme forward.

  ix.         The Council’s funding would be retained in reserves earning interest and would only be released when the £5million had been reached.

    x.         The Chief Executive had been nominated as the Council’s representative, investors were not politicians and were making their investments based on the projects in front of them which did not have political bias attached to them. There had to be political neutrality.

  xi.         This was a long-term fund which would survive many political administrations.

 xii.         The Officer nominated was also a national expert on the subject.

 

The Chief Executive highlighted recommendation no 3 of the Officer’s report which stated the Council’s investment was subject to progress towards funding commitments of £5m from other parties.

 

The Council had committed to funding in principle, it was now about identifying the funds, not about deploying the money. There would be a further stage of due diligence, which would provide an opportunity of additional scrutiny before funding would be released.

 

Councillor Bick proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation (iv),Councillor Young seconded, to add additional text to include Chair and Opposition Spokes (additional text underlined).

 

  iv.         Requested that drawdown is delegated to the Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources, following consultation with Chair and Opposition Spokes,  following reassurance from the Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer in consultation with that governance arrangements are in place and due diligence is completed.

 

The amendment was carried unanimously.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations as amended.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations as amended.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor