Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ
Contact: Democratic Services Committee Manager
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meetings held at 11am and 11.05am on 23 May 2024 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Mayor. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mayor's announcements Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillors Ashton, Howard, Sheil and Wade. Apologies for lateness were received from Councillor Smart. It was noted that Councillor Davey was attending the meeting virtually by MS Teams, which meant he could particate in debates but could not vote on any of the agenda items. Mayor’s Announcements Congratulations were given to Councillor Carling following his election as MP for North West Cambridgeshire. The Mayor also wished to note the hard work undertaken by Councillor Tong and Councillor Payne with their election campaigns. The Mayor reiterated the call for an immediate ceasefire in the Middle East and a return of the hostages. He called on leaders across the world to champion peace in this region to save lives and put an end to the bloodshed and negotiate with all parties to come to an amicable settlement of the issue and urged the international leadership to take the lead to resolve the conflict. The Mayor had attended a number of events across the city which included the Mott Sermon and the Midsummer Fair. Members were reminded that the Harvest Festival would be taking place on the 6 of October 2024. The Mayor also exercised his discretion to move item 6a – Recommendation from the Employment (Senior Officer) Committee to the end of the agenda as there was the potential for the item to be considered in exempt session. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public questions time Minutes: Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below. Question 1 Question on behalf of council tax payers and leaseholders of Parkside Place Cambridge for
the meeting of Cambridge City Council in the Council Chamber, The Guildhall
Cambridge on Thursday 18th July 2024 at 6pm. Background Parkside Place is an estate developed in
2012/2013 in the centre of Cambridge by Grosvenor Developments Ltd, a
company that is part of Grosvenor Estates, the family company of the Duke of
Westminster. The development is a mixed development comprising private
apartments, Affordable Housing Units (AFUs) and Cambridge Fire Station. In
gaining planning consent for the development, Grosvenor entered
into a S106 agreement with Cambridge City Council, Cambridgeshire County
Council and The Fire Authority. Under this agreement Grosvenor were obliged to
ensure that the service charges of the AFUs did not increase annually by a
figure in excess of retail price index (RPI). Grosvenor, by seemingly calculated alteration of
the final leases entered into with the residential
leaseholders and the Fire Authority, (without any transparency or prior
agreement), placed the obligation to pay any excess charge over RPI for the
AFUs on the residential leaseholders and the Fire Authority. To date the excess service charges for the AFUs
amounts to over £320,000 of which in excess of £50,000 has been borne by the
Fire Authority and therefore charged to council tax payers
under the precept. Residential leaseholders are taking legal action against
Grosvenor - quite clearly a civil matter. The question below is raised by
council tax payers in relation to the burden of
additional costs on the Fire Authority. The Question a) Does the council feel it
appropriate for council tax payers to bear part of the costs of a developer’s obligation
under a S106 agreement. (£50,000 to date and increasing annually) b) If it is felt that this is
inappropriate behaviour by the developer, will the
council make representations to Grosvenor on behalf of council tax payers. c) Should Grosvenor feel that there is no
obligation to recompense the Fire Authority and therefore council tax payers, will the council acknowledge that this behaviour should be taken into account in any future
planning application by Grosvenor Estates or their subsidiary companies. Connected questions were placed before the Fire
Authority at their meeting on June 20th 2024
at Shire Hall. The Chief Fire Officer has indicated that legal advice is being
taken on their position. The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building
Control and Infrastructure responded on behalf of the Leader:
i.
The council notes that the questions relate to the burden of additional
costs on the Fire Authority and that the Chief Fire Officer in a meeting on 20
June 2024 indicated they may be seeking legal advice on their position. ii.
The Section 106 agreement offered some protection to occupiers of
affordable dwellings (capped to the retail price index ‘RPI’) but did not offer
any protection to third parties and it was not the place of a planning
obligation to offer such protection. iii.
The service charge to non-affordable leaseholders was a civil legal dispute
and was not controlled through the planning permission. It was not for the
Local Planning Authority to intervene in this matter notwithstanding how the
charge may have been derived. iv.
There is no identifiable planning breach. v.
Had been contacted on numerous occasions by groups of residents regarding
leaseholders and service charges. Noted the new Government had included a Draft
Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill. Hoped the injustice of leasehold estates
would end soon. Supplementary
question: i. Agreed the developer had satisfied the terms of
the Section 106 Agreement in that they had satisfied the issue of making
certain that the affordable housing units did not pay service charges that went
up in excess of the RPI. ii. However, the obligation had been moved to other
parties; one being the leaseholders of Parkside Place, which was a civil issue.
Legal issues were on-going with the developer regarding this. iii. The Fire Authority was the other party that the
liability had been moved to and they had incurred £50,000 of additional costs,
which was passed onto council taxpayers under the precept. iv.Whilst they accepted that the developer had not
breached the terms of the Section 106 Agreement, they had transferred their
obligation to other parties. The
Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure
responded: i. Noted the comments which had been made by the
public speaker. The Leader would note the comments. It may be necessary to
speak with the Fire Authority to get further information and to see whether the
Council is able to respond more comprehensively. Question 2 The Federation of Cambridge Residents Associations would like to ask the
following question at the Full Council meeting, 18 July. Question The Federation of Cambridge Residents
Associations (FeCRA) shares the concerns of experts
that Cambridge will soon run out of water
The East of England is low-lying, and one of the
driest places in the UK. Water sources are under pressure meaning people,
plants and animals are competing for the same precious resources. With climate
change, drought is set to become more common amid hotter, drier summers, and
intense rainfall events more frequent. Many residents are very concerned about this and about the impact on the
Cam chalk streams and the wildlife that depends on them. Several solutions have been put forward
including new reservoirs, water transfer pipelines and stringent water
efficiency measures but these steps are urgently needed in any case to ensure
there will be enough water for existing users and the developments that already
have planning permission. Cambridge’s MP Daniel Zeichner Minister of State at the Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs is on public record as saying that growth in this
region can’t wait for reservoirs but the Environment
Agency has objected to developments such as Bourn and Darwin Green on the
grounds that they are not sustainable because there is not enough water. Our petition to the Environment Agency supports
these objections and asks that they continue to protect the environment by
opposing major developments in this region until there is clear evidence that
there is enough water to support them. It has now been signed by almost 1000 residents
- will the Council back the petition and ensure sufficient water can be
provided before planning approval is given to further large-scale
developments? https://www.change.org/p/save-our-chalk-streams-petition-to-the-environment-agency Chair, FeCRA The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building
Control and Infrastructure responded: i. The Council is concerned about the water
environment, and the effects of climate change. There had been record breaking
hot summers and long periods of heavy sustained rainfall. The Council had been
pressing the Government, water companies and other agencies to take action since issues regarding water supply came to
light. ii. A level of assurance had been requested with
regards to determinations of planning applications. The Planning and Compulsory
Purchase Act 2004 requires that planning applications be determined in
accordance with the Development or Local Plan unless material considerations
indicate otherwise. It is the Council’s job to weigh up a range of issues and
the merits of each application, giving appropriate weight to any Environment
Agency objection alongside other factors.
iii. Each planning application must be considered on
its merits. It would not be appropriate or consistent with the requirements of
the planning process to adopt a single position for all proposed development in
the city. iv.The Council would press for the resolution of
water needs as a priority and to keep residents and councillors
informed of any progress. Supplementary Question: i.
Concerns about water had been
raised with councillors since 2014/15. ii. The proposed new Fen Reservoir would not provide water to supercharge
Greater Cambridge. Cambridge Water had said the proposed new reservoir would
provide only half the water supply needed based on building 46,000 new homes by
2050 across the whole area (figures taken from the current draft Water
Resources Management Plan). iii. Residents had been informed that the Director of Planning had approved
plans for the West Cambridge site. Asked on what grounds the Director had done
so. The Director had cited a significant amount of activity associated with
water issues in Greater Cambridge last year and said that legal advice had been
taken. iv.Questioned
where the evidence was to back the Director’s decision. The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure
responded: i.
The City Council was involved
in the refusal of two planning applications based on the Environment Agency’s
objections regarding water. One planning application was the Brookgate development at North Cambridge Station and the
other was the Darwin Green planning application. Both decisions were appealed
and were subsequently determined by the Secretary of State. The appeal decision
and the Secretary of State’s decision about giving consent to those
applications became a material consideration. The Officer’s recommendation had
been approved by Committee. There were outstanding Section 106 Agreement issues
which took some time. Based on the Secretary of State and appeal decisions for
the above referenced applications, was the reason why the application was
processed. Question 3 We are residents of Scholars Court, a block of council
flats that rely on communal heating and hot water provided by Switch2. Since
the construction of these flats, Switch2 has been our sole provider. Recently,
Switch2 has notified us of an immediate doubling of their charges, which is
placing significant financial strain on many vulnerable tenants. Could the City Council review this situation and
consider finding a more affordable alternative provider for our communal
heating and hot water services? Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. The Executive Councillor for Housing responded: i.
Scholars Court is a block of
flats that the Council leases and is managed by Carter Jonas. The Council are
not involved in setting the charges for the communal heating system. ii.
Similar increases in charges
were seen in other blocks of flats across the city with communal heating last
year and also saw energy costs increase significantly
for communal heating and lighting across the council’s blocks of flat iii.
The Housing Team would make contact with Carter Jonas to find out more about the
increase and why the charges were increasing now and request that this is
communicated with all residents. iv.
If anyone experiences
financial hardship, the council offered financial inclusion support to tenants,
and this could be accessed via their Housing Officer. Question 4 For how much longer will the Council fail to deliver
on its promise to provide this marginal, but very real, community with a safe,
legal place to stop? Why do I have to continue to ask the same question and
receive the same irrelevant answer from a Council, which, like the election
result, has had an overall Labour majority for
several years, yet has failed to come up with a tiny plot of ground – the size
of a football pitch – for a transit site? This is much more than an oversight.
It is a blatant example of discrimination towards a protected ethnic minority,
clearly expressed in Section 149 of the Equality Act 20101.
Provisions of the Police Act 2022 further victimised
this community but resulted, on the 14/5/24, with an issuance by the High Court
of a declaration of incompatibility finding that provisions in the Police Act
unlawfully discriminate against Gypsies and Travellers.2 The
decision was based on the lack of authorised transit
site provision on which they could camp lawfully. The Council have protested
that they await the second of two GTANAs, which have taken over 4 years and
counting to produce and are, in any event, totally immaterial to the issue of
transit sites. On the same day as I was raising this question at the May full
council meeting, Council enforcement officers were threatening Travellers with eviction notices at an unauthorised
encampment at Arbury Town Park3. The Council state they do needs
assessments, while ignoring the pre-eminent ‘need’ of this community — their
deep-seated cultural way of life. They travel and leave a very light footprint
on the landscape, while holding on to their abiding belief in their right to
roam. They may have ‘need’ of social support when they stop, but to focus on
this is a racist endeavour. Like all other citizens,
they have a human right to a home or place to stop, just as the Council have a
duty to advance equality of opportunity; foster good relations and remove and minimise disadvantages. For how much longer will the Council fail to deliver
on its promise to provide this marginal, but very real, community with a safe,
legal transit site? Notes 1 Section
149 of the Equality Act 2010 stated 14 years ago that public bodies should have
regard to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation;
advance equality of opportunity; foster good relations; to remove and minimise disadvantages suffered by those due to their
protected characteristics; and to encourage them to participate in public life.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/ 2 https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/smith-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department/ 3 Travellers asked to leave 'unauthorised encampment' at
Cambridge park The Deputy Leader responded on behalf of the Executive Councillor for
Communities:
i.
It was unfair to say that the
Executive Councillor for Communities and the Council hadn’t been working on
this issue or taking it seriously.
ii.
If the answer was to simply
find a plot of land, this opportunity would have already been taken up. Multiple areas had been considered for
temporary sites, but these had not been found to be suitable.
iii.
It was not just a City Council
issue and needed to work with partners South Cambridgeshire District Council
and the County Council who were essential in the process.
iv.
The Executive Councillor for
Communities was now part of the GRT Steering Group which had previously been
set up by Councillor Healy. Had been pushing for details of the GTANA report
including costings, remit, scope and details of its commission.
v.
City Council Officer capacity
was being reviewed to ensure they could give as much help as possible.
vi.
The Executive Councillor had
communicated with officers that this issue was urgent.
vii.
Noted that this was also a
planning issue and the Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and
Infrastructure had been pushing for the new draft Local Plan to identify sites
before the Local Plan went out for consultation in 2025. viii.
The July Strategic Steering
Group was unfortunately unable to meet and would need to be rescheduled for the
autumn. The Group would look at the Needs Assessment.
ix.
It was important that
community groups and stakeholders were able to input into the next steps
regarding the Needs Assessment. The GRT Liaison Officer had started work on
this and believed the public speaker had been approached about this. Supplementary question:
i.
Noted that it was not simply
about finding a plot of land, it was also about attitudes towards the GRT
community. Not having stopping places / transit sites severely affected the GRT
community.
ii.
Noted that Cambridge City had
never had traveller sites but that sites existed on
the borders of the city. People had sought to obtain planning permission for
sites where they reside for several years without success.
iii.
Asked for an explanation why
sites had been found to be unsuitable.
iv.
Had been waiting for a GTANA
for 4 years. Noted the current GTANA was the second GTANA and was irrelevant to
the issue of transit site provision. Transit sites were the ones which caused
problems with community relations.
v.
Felt the Council was evading
the issue. The Deputy Leader advised that the Executive Councillor for Communities
would be better placed to respond to the issues raised and the Executive
Councillor for Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure could also liaise
with the public speaker outside of the meeting. Question 5 Motion 8e calls for the city
council: "To adopt the Vision
statement which positions the Council as a place maker, convenor and community
facilitator as well as playing a core role in providing public services" With the above in mind: What discussions will the
council have with partner organisations to organise, co-ordinate, and sequence consultation events for
future proposals that affect the future of our city and beyond, and what
actions could the council take including but not limited to: - A shared single
meetings/consultations calendar for public sector organisations
(such as local councils which can scrape calendar data) - Annual 'societies fairs'
similar to the students unions freshers fairs for
societies - civic education for adults
mindful of some of the questions that were put to the general election
candidates that indicated a collective lack of knowledge on how our city
functions and malfunctions - Developer-funded events that
bring together multiple proposals for residents to look at in the round rather
than piecemeal and at short notice as at present. The Deputy Leader responded:
i.
Thanked the public speaker for
all they did to share knowledge about local democracy / governance and the rich
history of Cambridge.
ii.
Agreed consultation with
residents was important.
iii.
Acknowledged the complex
structure of local government in Cambridgeshire.
iv.
Had attended a Cambridge BID
board meeting that day, which had been looking at freight and deliveries coming
into and out of Cambridge and also the Civic Quarter
proposals. Had not thought that these issues would overlap however when the
Board was discussing these issues a lot of interesting points were raised about
both issues.
v.
Wanted to highlight the work
of Cambridge Council for Voluntary Service, who coordinated the online
volunteering platform in the city; and who hosted events for charities.
vi.
Referred to a report on the
Council agenda regarding the future of Area Committees. Which aimed to re-centre resident engagement with the democratic
process.
vii.
It was important to hear what
work would help to facilitate community dialogue. Some things were already
taking place and could not commit to the actions suggested by the public
speaker without considering funding, officer time and capacity etc. Supplementary question:
i.
Was one of the interviewees
for the work being done looking at Area Committees. Commented that one of the
issues with Area Committees was the inability to get decision makers
responsible for commissioning GPs and dentists to meet and speak with residents
about the shortages.
ii.
Had filmed 6 different
hustings across Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire for the general election and
it was evident from the questions put forward by members of the public that
there was a lack of knowledge about how the city functions / malfunctions ie: Daniel Zeichner was asked why he had not sorted out
potholes.
iii.
Urged councillors
to lobby the Mayor of the Combined Authority to ask what they could do to
provide learning opportunities for democracy in civic education.
iv.
Referred to motion 8e on the
agenda and hoped that by 2050 there would be a new university swimming pool and
a new large concert hall venue. The Deputy Leader responded:
i.
Was pleased to hear that the public
speaker had been involved in the Area Committee review work.
ii.
Referred to a consultation
currently taking place regarding the future of Local Government, which was open
until 3 September 2024. Project:
Future of local government for Cambridge | Cambridge City Council Question 6 Developers are describing the lakes adjacent to Snakey Path and Cherry Hinton Brook as ‘just amazing’ but
proposals for their opening as an urban country park, as part of the Mission
Street science centre planning application mean they
will soon become very ordinary. The
lakes are a designated City Wildlife Site, home to chalk grassland wildflowers,
orchids and numerous birds. But the plans include lakeside paving, unregulated
access throughout much of the area, and three new access points via the Tins, a
pedestrian and cycle path currently beset by many problems. Somewhat naively,
the developers consider that the annual hot weather anti-social behaviour will be managed by ‘passive surveillance’. Would Councillors
consider delaying decisions about this component of the application until
adequate consultation has been held with local residents
and environmental groups, workable solutions developed for public access and
health and safety issues, and mechanisms found to safeguard the important
biodiversity of the area? The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure responded: i. The planning application included all three land components identified in Policy 16 of the Local Plan (including an Urban Country Park) and therefore any recommendation / decision to be made will be on the basis of compliance with the allocation. ii. The Applicant had recently submitted a Framework Management Plan (FMP) for the park, and this could be viewed on the Council’s website. Neighbour notification letters had recently been issued by officers drawing attention to the FMP (amongst other amendments) and comments are invited. iii. The purpose of the FMP is to set out broadly how ecological and access enhancement to both Parcels B and C was to be achieved and managed; the financial management arrangements; and the governance and decision-making structures to ensure the overall propositions remain sustainable into the longer term. iv. The future governance/decision making structures would accommodate opportunities for a wide variety of stakeholders (including local interest groups) to become involved in the future delivery of the urban country park. v. Any decision to delay the application would need to be made by the Case Officer. When an application is considered by the Planning Committee deferment could be considered if more information was required. Supplementary question: i. Commented that their question didn’t refer to the Finance and Management Plan (FMP) although residents were aware of it. ii. Noted that the consultation which had been announced was running during the summer holidays and was open until 15 August. This was inappropriate as many residents wouldn’t receive their notification about this until they returned from holiday. iii. The FMP was based on the current proposals for the three parcels. Had concerns with parcels B and C. Did not think these were in line with the Local Plan. iv. Parcels B and C represented an opportunity for new open space and areas for biodiversity protection. The current proposals would lead to a loss of biodiversity. v. The City Wildlife Ecologist and other wildlife experts had pointed out the conflict between the proposals for recreation in parcel C and the closure of parcel B to recreation which was contrary to what was in the Local Plan. This was why a delay had been requested. The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure responded: i. Would raise concerns regarding the consultation dates with officers. ii. Suggested that comments on the planning application should be submitted through the Planning Portal. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To consider the recommendations of the Executive for adoption |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Outturn Report 2023/24 (Executive Councillor for Housing) Additional documents: Minutes: Resolved (by 22 votes to 0
with 14 abstentions) to: i. Approve carry forward requests of £12,507,000 in HRA and General Fund Housing capital budgets and associated resources from 2023/24 into 2024/25 and beyond to fund re-phased net capital spending, as detailed in Appendix D and the associated notes to the appendix in the officer’s report. ii. Approve a revised capital financing structure for 2023/24, utilising £8 million of capital reserves set-aside for either debt redemption or re-investment, in place of borrowing and direct revenue financing of capital. This recognises the current high interest rates for borrowing and the need to maintain a prudent level of revenue reserves following the requirement to allow for payment of rent refunds arising from the rent regulation error. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: i.
Approve the report, including Council’s actual Prudential and Treasury
Indicators for 2023/24. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: Resolved (by 21 votes to 0 with 14 abstentions) to: i. Approve carry forward requests totalling £2,959,740 of revenue funding from 2023/24 to 2024/25, as detailed in Appendix C of the Officer’s report. These are carry forward requests in excess of £50k. Requests up to and including £50k which total £153,720 are approved via delegated authority to the Chief Financial Officer. ii. Approve carry forward requests of £19,855,000 of capital resources from 2023/24 to 2024/25 to fund rephased net capital spending, as detailed in Appendix D of the Officer’s report. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To consider the recommendations of Committees for adoption |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The confidential report to the Employment (Senior Officer) Committee contains exempt information during which the public is likely to be excluded from the meeting subject to determination by Council following consideration of a public interest test. This exclusion would be made under paragraph 1 and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. Additional documents:
Minutes: Resolved (unanimously) to: i. Approve termination costs over £100k arising from the Chief Executive's Office and Corporate Group Design due to contractual severance. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Civic Affairs Committee - Update on alternative options to Area Committees Additional documents:
Minutes: Resolved (by 25 votes to 0
with 10 abstentions): i. That Area Committees be paused for the remainder of the municipal year, 2024/25, while pilot work on alternatives continue and while more detailed proposals are developed for implementation from the start of the municipal year 2025/26. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To deal with oral questions Minutes: Question 1 Councillor Porrer to Executive Councillor for Community Safety, Homelessness and Wellbeing. Could the Executive Councillor please update council on how noisy and antisocial driving is being dealt with throughout the city? The Executive Councillor for Community Safety, Homelessness and Wellbeing responded: i. The Police continued to enforce against anti-social and nuisance driving in the city through ‘Operation Staple’. ii. Encouraged residents to report concerns to the Police. Report antisocial behaviour | Cambridgeshire Constabulary (cambs.police.uk). iii. The Police coordinate ‘Community Speedwatch’, which enabled residents to let the Police know about areas where there were concerns about speeding. Community Speed Watch | Cambridgeshire Constabulary (cambs.police.uk) iv.Referred to the Vision Zero Partnership which was exploring future road safety days of action. Road Safety Partnership (cprsp.co.uk) Question 2 Councillor Dryden to Executive Councillor for Climate Action and Environment. How well are the bin collection rounds going following the implementation of the 4-day week trial? The Executive Councillor for Climate Action and Environment responded: i. The 4-day week waste trial continued to progress well. Operations crews had readily adjusted to the new arrangements. ii. Waste rounds were being completed on time and recruitment and retention of staff was improving. Teams were familiar with their collection rounds and missed bin collection rates had fallen since the introduction of the 4-day week. iii. The 4-day week trial was introduced at the same time that the new waste collection routes were introduced following the round optimisation project. Despite this major change across the city, successful collection rates for quarter 4 were 99.85%. iv.A high-quality service was continuing to be provided for residents and there was a positive impact on waste crews for their health and wellbeing. Question 3 Councillor Sheil to Executive Councillor for Community Safety, Homelessness and Wellbeing. Could the Executive Councillor for Community Safety, Homelessness and Wellbeing update us on what is being done to support women experiencing homelessness in Cambridge? The Executive Councillor for Community Safety, Homelessness and Wellbeing responded: i. Grant funding was provided to a range of organisations including: a. the Cambridge Women’s Resources Centre to fund a Support Worker who provided homelessness prevention advice to women. b. Cambridge Women’s Aid to provide a specialist open access community support service for women affected by domestic abuse; and c. the CHS Group funding their young parent project. ii. The Council had achieved Domestic Alliance Accreditation meaning the Council had demonstrated compliance with good practice standards when responding to homelessness enquiries from women when they disclosed domestic abuse. iii. Noted that female rough sleepers may have different needs to male rough sleepers. As part of the Council’s Rough Sleepers Plan which had to be submitted to Central Government as part of funding arrangements, the Council specifically aimed to reduce the number of female rough sleepers. This had been challenging over the past year and the Council was putting in place measures to try and reduce the number of female rough sleepers. iv.A census would be undertaken in the autumn with Change Grow Live Cambridge - Drug & Alcohol Service Cambridgeshire | Change Grow Live. It was hoped that the data obtained from the census would assist the Council in applying for further funding from Central Government. v. The Council also worked with ‘It Takes a City’ and had part funded ‘the Haven’ which provided a safe space for women who were homeless or vulnerably housed. Question 4 Councillor Todd-Jones to Leader of the Council. Given the gravity of the previous government's proposals set out in the 'Case for Cambridge', how will the Leader be engaging in discussions on this with the new Labour government? The Leader responded: i. Discussions with the new Labour Government would start afresh. ii. Post election, needed to reflect upon the important role the Combined Authority would have. Discussions had started between the Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the Combined Authority and how Central Government could be influenced regarding the ‘Case for Cambridge’. iii. Had met with Peter Freeman the day before, to discuss where Homes England fitted. Referred to announcements which had been made that day by Peter Freeman regarding Northstowe. iv.Officers were working closely with Treasury Civil Servants and had met with them earlier in the week. Cambridge would remain a significant part of national regeneration taking into consideration its contribution to economic wealth across the country. v. Growth wasn’t just about housing and included skills, jobs, transport, infrastructure and it was vital these points were made clear to the new Government. Question 5 Councillor Flaubert to Executive Councillor for Housing. Does the Exec Cllr believe that its letting policy and Home Link application system is fit for purpose? The Executive Councillor for Housing responded: i. Homelink is a partnership of six local authority areas with a Combined Lettings Policy and Choice-Based Letting System. ii. The Lettings Policy is transparent about giving reasonable preference for the levels of housing need in line with legislation. They are delivered under bandings based on priorities. The bandings were agreed as part of the partnership and include four levels of housing need a) – d). iii. There was also significant flexibility within the Policy to allow for discretion around priority in exceptional cases. iv.The partnership regularly reviewed the Policy to ensure that it remained fit for purpose and considered any changes in legislation. v. The Homelink application system remained fit for purpose; the cost of the system and its administration was shared across the partnership. Feedback from customers and partners remain positive and it provided transparency about how priorities are allocated. Question 6 Councillor Divkovic to Executive Councillor for Housing. Could the Executive Councillor for Housing give us an update on our tenant audits? The Executive Councillor for Housing responded: i. Tenancy audits had been conducted since April 2022. ii. Up to the end of June 2024, 1485, visits had been undertaken which was 21% of the Council’s housing stock. iii. Was looking at how the programme could be escalated so it did not take 10 years to complete. iv.Issues identified from the tenancy audits included: a. 19% of tenants accepting assistance to move to more suitable accommodation for their needs. b. 28% of tenants being provided with support and identifying domestic abuse at 64 visits, which enabled officers to offer support and advice and make safeguarding referrals. c. Four properties had been identified as being abandoned. d. Nine properties were identified as being sublet. e. 60% of all audits undertaken had highlighted issues to do with property condition including unreported repairs in 33% of the audited properties. f. 10% had unauthorised adaptations. g. 7% had damp and mould. Question 7 Councillor Bennett to Leader of the Council. Please can the Leader explain what his plans are to improve the sustainability and quality of Cambridge tourism given the failure of the tourist tax vote? The Deputy Leader responded: i. Wanted to acknowledge all the work which had gone into drafting up the proposals for the accommodation bid (‘A Bid'). ii. Visit England had described it as a well-developed proposal, and it had support from some businesses the City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council. It came as a surprise that the proposal would not be taken forward. iii. The ‘A Bid’ funded by a visitor levy offered the opportunity for a step change in investment offering up to £9million investment over 5 years in Cambridge for Cambridge visitors economy. iv. Acknowledged that it was never going to be the only solution. v. Next steps would be discussed at the next Cambridge Bid Board meeting. vi. The City Council would continue to work closely with Cambridge Bid and Visit Cambridge Partners (Kings College and Curating Cambridge) to improve the visitor experience, and create more value from tourism and improve sustainability. vii. Would continue to develop the Destination Management Plan for Cambridge, which was being worked on with Visit Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire District Council. viii. Discussions would take place with Visit England and the Combined Authority around establishing a local visitor economy partnership. Question 8 Councillor Clough to Executive Councillor for Open Spaces and City Services. While supportive in principle of the Voi trials there are a number of concerns about the parking arrangements for the bikes and scooters. In some places, such as the Grantchester St/Driftway junction they are blocking the footpath and are a hazard for pedestrians and cyclists. They appeared without notice overnight so my questions is: Who decided these designated drop/off and collect locations were suitable, why was there no consultation with local councillors and residents and what action will be taken to remove them urgently from dangerous locations? The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure responded: i. Noted that most councillors had been contacted by residents and businesses about inconsiderately parked e-scooters / bikes. ii. Found that Voi responded quickly when notified about concerns. iii. Was happy to liaise with Senior Managers at Voi or suggested liaising with Councillor Anna Smith who could raise the issue at the Combined Authority. iv. Residents had contacted her asking for e-scooters to be located closer to where they lived; these requests had been passed onto Voi who had responded positively. v. Local Voi operatives identified places around the city which might be suitable for a number of e-scooters / bikes depending on how much space there was. The Voi City Success Manager for Cambridge regularly met with city and county council representatives to check the locations and how many e-scooters / bikes were proposed. Proximity to junctions/ accesses/ highway features was considered. Officers would refuse parking if it was likely to cause problems with sustainability. In some instances, officers suggested trialling a smaller number of e-scooters / bikes and monitoring feedback. Voi was usually quick to remove e-scooters / bikes when requested. vi. Believed the location referred to a trial parking spot. Officers were aware of the issues and had asked for the parking spot to be removed completely. A full list of oral questions including those not asked during the meeting can be found in the Information Pack, which is published on the meeting webpage. Agenda for Council on Thursday, 18th July, 2024, 6.00 pm - Cambridge Council |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To consider the following notices of motion, notice of which has been given by: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Tong - Hope for private renters Background to motion It is now nearly 5 years since the last government made a commitment to reform
the private rental market and protect people from “no fault” evictions. These evictions were introduced by s21 Housing Act
1988. They have created a climate of fear for private renters, which can
inhibit them from asking for much needed repairs. After much delay a Renters (Reform) Bill 2024 was drafted which would have
reduced the scope of “no fault” evictions,
but was halted by the announcement of the July 4
2024 General Election. Since the announcement of the proposed reform, rates
of s21 “no fault” evictions have risen sharply, with 900 s21 “no fault”
evictions per week recorded in the UK. The true figure is likely to be higher
because not all these evictions are recorded. Active Motion This Council notes: According to the 2021 Census, 31% of Cambridge
households were in private rental accommodation. The welfare of these residents
is of great importance to our city. When residents are made homeless, there can also be an
obligation placed on the council (“homelessness duty”) A
rise in private tenants made homeless is likely to increase the strain on
council resources. Re-introduction of the Renters (Reform) Bill to
Parliament (preferably with the 81 amendments tabled by the then opposition
parties) would protect private renters from unfair treatment and improve their
quality of life. Any delay in re-introducing this bill or a similar one
leaves tenants exposed to s21 eviction. It is accordingly important that this bill (or a
similar bill) is made law at the earliest possible date. The Council therefore resolves to write to the Rt Hon
Angela Rayner, copying in our local MPs asking her to bring forward a new renters
reform bill at
the earliest possible date. (At the time of drafting this motion, the Council is
unaware of whether such a proposal will be included in the King’s Speech on 17
July 2024 and shall adjust the letter accordingly.) The Council also proposes to require its private
rentals team to consider whether support for private tenants can be increased
in the short term before any increase in legal protection and bring a report to
the appropriate council committee on its proposals in Autumn 2024. The Council wishes particularly to require officers to
report on whether
it would be practical to introduce a local version of the measures introduced
by the Mayor of London, including online resources Rogue Landlord and Agent
Checker, Property Licence Checker and Report a Rogue Landlord tool. Useful Links (not part of active
motion) We have included some background papers that we found
useful. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10004/ We have also drawn upon the 2021 Census figures and
the council’s own Housing Facts. Minutes: Councillor Tong proposed and Councillor Bennett seconded the following motion: Background to motion It is now nearly 5 years since the last government made a commitment to reform the private rental market and protect people from “no fault” evictions. These evictions were introduced by s21 Housing Act 1988. They have created a climate of fear for private renters, which can inhibit them from asking for much needed repairs. After much delay a Renters (Reform) Bill 2024 was drafted which would have reduced the scope of “no fault” evictions, but was halted by the announcement of the July 4 2024 General Election. Since the announcement of the proposed reform, rates of s21 “no fault” evictions have risen sharply, with 900 s21 “no fault” evictions per week recorded in the UK. The true figure is likely to be higher because not all these evictions are recorded. Active Motion This Council notes: According to the 2021 Census, 31% of Cambridge households were in private rental accommodation. The welfare of these residents is of great importance to our city. When residents are made homeless, there can also be an obligation placed on the council (“homelessness duty”) A rise in private tenants made homeless is likely to increase the strain on council resources. Re-introduction of the Renters (Reform) Bill to Parliament (preferably with the 81 amendments tabled by the then opposition parties) would protect private renters from unfair treatment and improve their quality of life. Any delay in re-introducing this bill or a similar one leaves tenants exposed to s21 eviction. It is accordingly important that this bill (or a similar bill) is made law at the earliest possible date. The Council therefore resolves to write to the Rt Hon Angela Rayner, copying in our local MPs asking her to bring forward a new renters reform bill at the earliest possible date. (At the time of drafting this motion, the Council is unaware of whether such a proposal will be included in the King’s Speech on 17 July 2024 and shall adjust the letter accordingly.) The Council also proposes to require its private rentals team to consider whether support for private tenants can be increased in the short term before any increase in legal protection and bring a report to the appropriate council committee on its proposals in Autumn 2024. The Council wishes particularly to require officers to report on whether it would be practical to introduce a local version of the measures introduced by the Mayor of London, including online resources Rogue Landlord and Agent Checker, Property Licence Checker and Report a Rogue Landlord tool. Useful Links (not part of active motion) We have included some background papers that we found useful. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10004/ We have also drawn upon the 2021 Census figures and the council’s own Housing Facts. Councillor Holloway proposed and Councillor Bird seconded
the following amendment to motion (deleted text Background to motion It is now nearly 5 years since the last government made a commitment to reform the private rental market and protect people from “no fault” evictions. These evictions were introduced by s21 Housing Act 1988. They have created a climate of fear for private renters, which can inhibit them from asking for much needed repairs. After much delay a Renters (Reform) Bill 2024 was drafted which would have reduced the scope of “no fault” evictions, but was halted by the announcement of the July 4 2024 General Election. Since the announcement of the proposed reform, rates of s21 “no fault” evictions have risen sharply, with 900 s21 “no fault” evictions per week recorded in the UK. The true figure is likely to be higher because not all these evictions are recorded. Active Motion This Council notes: According to the 2021 Census, 31% of Cambridge households were in private rental accommodation. The welfare of these residents is of great importance to our city. In October 2022, the Council passed a motion
(https://democracy.cambridge.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=29659) resolving to, among
other things, set up a private renters’ forum, to re-consider the need for a
Selective Landlord Licensing Scheme, and to ensure that all HMOs in the city
are inspected, improved if needed, and licensed. The Council is taking a proactive approach to
private tenant engagement, with a presence in supermarkets and at events such
as ARU Property Fair and the Big Lunch, as well as monthly drop-in sessions. The Council has an HMO licensing scheme, and rogue
landlords can be reported to the Council. When residents are made homeless, there can also be an obligation placed on the council (“homelessness duty”). A rise in private tenants made homeless is likely to increase the strain on council resources. Re-introduction of the Renters (Reform) Bill to Parliament Any delay in re-introducing this bill or a similar one leaves tenants exposed to s21 eviction. It is accordingly important that this bill (or a similar bill) is made law at the earliest possible date.
The Labour Party’s 2024 manifesto states: ‘We will
immediately abolish Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions, prevent private renters
being exploited and discriminated against, empower them to challenge
unreasonable rent increases, and take steps to decisively raise standards,
including extending ‘Awaab’s Law’ to the private sector.’
(https://labour.org.uk/change/break-down-barriers-to-opportunity/) This Council resolves: To welcome the Labour Party’s commitment to immediately
abolishing Section 21 evictions and to introducing other measures to support
private renters, including setting up a National Landlords Register. To keep under review how the Council can use and work
within the framework of any new national legislation to further support private
renters.
Useful Links (not part of active motion) We have included some background papers that we found useful. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10004/ We have also drawn upon the 2021 Census figures and the council’s own Housing Facts. The amendment was carried by 20 votes in favour to 5 against and 10 abstentions. Resolved (unanimously) that: Background to motion It is now nearly 5 years since the last government made a commitment to reform the private rental market and protect people from “no fault” evictions. These evictions were introduced by s21 Housing Act 1988. They have created a climate of fear for private renters, which can inhibit them from asking for much needed repairs. After much delay a Renters (Reform) Bill 2024 was drafted which would have reduced the scope of “no fault” evictions, but was halted by the announcement of the July 4 2024 General Election. Since the announcement of the proposed reform, rates of s21 “no fault” evictions have risen sharply, with 900 s21 “no fault” evictions per week recorded in the UK. The true figure is likely to be higher because not all these evictions are recorded. Active Motion This Council notes: According to the 2021 Census, 31% of Cambridge households were in private rental accommodation. The welfare of these residents is of great importance to our city. In October 2022, the Council passed a motion (https://democracy.cambridge.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=29659) resolving to, among other things, set up a private renters’ forum, to re-consider the need for a Selective Landlord Licensing Scheme, and to ensure that all HMOs in the city are inspected, improved if needed, and licensed. The Council is taking a proactive approach to private tenant engagement, with a presence in supermarkets and at events such as ARU Property Fair and the Big Lunch, as well as monthly drop-in sessions. The Council has an HMO licensing scheme, and rogue landlords can be reported to the Council. When residents are made homeless, there can also be an obligation placed on the council (“homelessness duty”). A rise in private tenants made homeless is likely to increase the strain on council resources. Re-introduction of the Renters (Reform) Bill to Parliament or a similar bill would protect private renters from unfair treatment and improve their quality of life. Any delay in re-introducing this bill or a similar one leaves tenants exposed to s21 eviction. It is accordingly important that this bill (or a similar bill) is made law at the earliest possible date. The Labour Party’s 2024 manifesto states: ‘We will immediately abolish Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions, prevent private renters being exploited and discriminated against, empower them to challenge unreasonable rent increases, and take steps to decisively raise standards, including extending ‘Awaab’s Law’ to the private sector.’ (https://labour.org.uk/change/break-down-barriers-to-opportunity/) This Council resolves: To welcome the Labour Party’s commitment to immediately abolishing Section 21 evictions and to introducing other measures to support private renters, including setting up a National Landlords Register. To keep under review how the Council can use and work within the framework of any new national legislation to further support private renters. Useful Links (not part of active motion) We have included some background papers that we found useful. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10004/ We have also drawn upon the 2021 Census figures and the council’s own Housing Facts. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Payne - Sewage Pollution in our water Council notes the public outrage displayed in the general
election about the pollution of rivers, waterways and beaches by sewage - an
outrage which is shared locally in relation to the River Cam. With the last government having been unwilling to take
convincing measures to address this, council calls on the new government now to
treat this as a priority for action, including introduction of criminal
liability of water companies and suspension of executive bonuses for failure to
meet performance targets. Council requests the Chief Executive to write to the new Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs seeking the inclusion of legislation to appear in the very first King’s Speech, and to both of Cambridge’s MPs asking them to support this. Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Payne altered their motion under Council
Procedure Rule 26.1 with the consent of Council. Councillor Hauk seconded the
motion. The altered motion is detailed below, deleted text Council notes the public outrage displayed
in the general election about the pollution of rivers, waterways and beaches by
sewage - an outrage which is shared locally in relation to the River
Cam. With the last government having been
unwilling to take convincing measures to address this, council calls on the new
government now to treat this as a priority for action, including introduction
of criminal liability of water companies and suspension of executive bonuses
for failure to meet performance targets. Council requests the Chief Executive to
write to the new Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs Councillor Thornburrow altered their
amendment to motion under Council Procedure Rule 23.4, deleted text Council notes the public outrage displayed
in the general election about the pollution of rivers, waterways and beaches by
sewage – an outrage which is shared locally in relation to the River Cam.
Council further notes that change has begun,
as seen in the inclusion of the Water (Special Measures) Bill in the King’s
Speech, a bill which will ·
ensure water bosses face
personal criminal liability for lawbreaking. ·
give the water regulator
powers to ban the payment of bonuses when environmental standards are not met. ·
introduce a ‘code of
conduct’ for water companies, so customers can summon board members and hold
executives to account. ·
and require water companies
to install real-time monitors at every sewage outlet with data independently
scrutinised by the water regulators. Council therefore requests the Chief
Executive The amendment was carried by 20 votes in favour to 15 against. Resolved (unanimously) that: Council further
notes that change has begun, as seen in the inclusion of the Water (Special
Measures) Bill in the King’s Speech, a bill which will ·
ensure water bosses face personal criminal
liability for lawbreaking. ·
give the water regulator powers to ban the
payment of bonuses when environmental standards are not met. ·
introduce a ‘code of conduct’ for water
companies, so customers can summon board members and hold executives to
account. ·
and require water companies to install
real-time monitors at every sewage outlet with data independently scrutinised
by the water regulators. Council therefore
requests the Chief Executive write to the Secretary of State for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs, Steven Reed, welcoming the inclusion of legislation in
the very first King’s Speech. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Lee - Our Voting System The Council notes that the recent general election produced
a new government with 100% of the power after winning two-thirds of the
Parliamentary seats with only a third of the popular vote, when turnout was the
lowest since 2001. It considers that 'First Past The Post' is neither fair,
inclusive, representative or popular and that it encourages voter
disengagement, with surveys frequently showing that switching to a form of
proportional representation is widely popular. It calls on the Leader of the Council to write to the Prime
Minister to express our dissatisfaction with the current electoral system, and
our belief that a better system is both possible and desirable, and to ask him
to set up a Citizens' Assembly to explore a system of voting fit for the
Twenty-First century, encompassing national, local and mayoral elections. It also calls on the Leader of the Council to write to the city’s two members of Parliament calling for their support for this request. Minutes: Councillor Lee proposed and Councillor Young seconded the following
motion: The Council notes that the recent general election produced a new government
with 100% of the power after winning two-thirds of the Parliamentary seats with
only a third of the popular vote, when turnout was the lowest since 2001. It considers that 'First Past The Post' is neither fair, inclusive,
representative or popular and that it encourages voter disengagement, with
surveys frequently showing that switching to a form of proportional
representation is widely popular. It calls on the Leader of the Council to write to the Prime Minister to
express our dissatisfaction with the current electoral system, and our belief
that a better system is both possible and desirable, and to ask him to set up a
Citizens' Assembly to explore a system of voting fit for the Twenty-First
century, encompassing national, local and mayoral elections. It also calls on the Leader of the Council to write to the city’s two
members of Parliament calling for their support for this request. Councillor Gilderdale proposed and Councillor Griffin seconded the
following amendment to motion (deleted text The Council This Council believes that electoral reform can help to improve both
engagement and tackle polarisation within our political system and will
therefore: • Ask the Chief Executive to write to the
Government asking it to re-introduce proportional voting systems for the
elections for Police and Crime Commissioners and Directly Elected Mayors during
this parliament, at the same time expressing regret that the single
transferrable voting system was removed from these elections in the first
place. • Ask the relevant Officers at the City
Council to develop a plan, working with partners at the County Council (who
passed a similar motion earlier in the year) to encourage greater understanding
of the role of the different tiers of local government here in Cambridge, and
in particular to bring forward proposals about how we can work to better engage
with younger people in Cambridgeshire to increase participation in local
elections.
The amendment was carried by 21 votes in favour to 14 against. Resolved (unanimously) that: This Council
believes that electoral reform can help to improve both engagement and tackle
polarisation within our political system and will therefore: • Ask
the Chief Executive to write to the Government asking it to re-introduce
proportional voting systems for the elections for Police and Crime
Commissioners and Directly Elected Mayors during this parliament, at the same
time expressing regret that the single transferrable voting system was removed
from these elections in the first place. • Ask
the relevant Officers at the City Council to develop a plan, working with
partners at the County Council (who passed a similar motion earlier in the
year) to encourage greater understanding of the role of the different tiers of
local government here in Cambridge, and in particular to bring forward
proposals about how we can work to better engage with younger people in
Cambridgeshire to increase participation in local elections. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Glasberg - Declaration of a Water Emergency This Council notes with concern the rapidly accelerating water crisis
that we are facing. Cambridge experienced severe drought in 2022 and 2023,
while recently we have seen some of the wettest six months on record in the UK,
which have caused flooding in many parts of the city and surrounding areas,
damaged agriculture, roads and other public infrastructure, and affected the
lives of numerous residents. We now have by turns either too much or too little water, as well as
distressingly high levels of pollution.
When residents see local flooding, they may think that our water
shortage is over. Unfortunately, drought
and flooding go hand in hand as dry hard soil fails to absorb water. Valuable
rain fails to reach our chalk streams and instead contributes to flooding. In 2019, the City Council declared biodiversity and climate emergencies.
This helped to raise public awareness of these critical issues and influenced
planning and other decisions. We need a water emergency declaration for the same reasons. This council recognises that other agencies are charged with water
management. However, we acknowledge the impact of our own actions and decisions
on our local water issues. We acknowledge that without broad engagement and
co-operation that the chances of any improvement in our water situation is very
limited. This may be the longest motion that Greens have ever submitted to this
council. We make no apologies for this. The scale of the crisis and the extent
of the water supply gap is such that we consider that no prudent or responsible
person can justify leaving any stone unturned to improve the situation This council: · Asserts that our water
issues go wider than the supply and sewage problems that are the responsibility
of the local water companies · Resolves to take steps
to ensure the public are aware of the full extent of our water supply gap by
monitoring and republishing the information prepared by Water Resources East,
the Environment Agency and others as appropriate and providing full and clear
information on the extent of the water gap. · Pledges to encourage
all organisational departments, partners and our communities, businesses and
residents to address the water crisis within Cambridge and the wider region,
and · To take a full and
active part in that work ourselves and employ our “soft power” fully (1) Declare recognition of the water emergency and the local impact this
could have on the residents, communities and businesses we serve; (2) Help reduce over-abstraction by: · Giving full weight in
planning applications for large-scale developments to the evidence of the
Environment Agency as statutory consultee on water issues · Writing to the Rt Hon
Angela Rayner to request the withdrawal or amendment of the 8 May 2024 WMS
(“Written Ministerial Statement”) on the Cambridge Delivery Group to be
replaced with a new WMS requiring greater priority to be given to water issues
in considering any local planning applications · Writing to the Rt Hon Angela Rayner to request that planning matters in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire remain under the ... view the full agenda text for item 24/72/CNL Minutes: Councillor Glasberg proposed and Councillor Bennett seconded the following motion: This Council notes with concern the rapidly accelerating water crisis
that we are facing. Cambridge experienced severe drought in 2022 and 2023,
while recently we have seen some of the wettest six months on record in the UK,
which have caused flooding in many parts of the city and surrounding areas,
damaged agriculture, roads and other public infrastructure, and affected the
lives of numerous residents. We now have by turns either too much or too little water, as well as
distressingly high levels of pollution.
When residents see local flooding, they may think that our water
shortage is over. Unfortunately, drought
and flooding go hand in hand as dry hard soil fails to absorb water. Valuable
rain fails to reach our chalk streams and instead contributes to flooding. In 2019, the City Council declared biodiversity and climate emergencies.
This helped to raise public awareness of these critical issues and influenced
planning and other decisions. We need a water emergency declaration for the same reasons. This council recognises that other agencies are charged with water
management. However, we acknowledge the impact of our own actions and decisions
on our local water issues. We acknowledge that without broad engagement and
co-operation that the chances of any improvement in our water situation is very limited. This may be the longest motion that Greens have ever submitted to this
council. We make no apologies for this. The scale of the crisis and the extent
of the water supply gap is such that we consider that no prudent or responsible
person can justify leaving any stone unturned to improve the situation This council: ·
Asserts that our water issues go wider than the
supply and sewage problems that are the responsibility of the local water
companies ·
Resolves to take steps to ensure the public are
aware of the full extent of our water supply gap by monitoring and republishing
the information prepared by Water Resources East, the Environment Agency and
others as appropriate and providing full and clear information on the extent of
the water gap. ·
Pledges to encourage all organisational
departments, partners and our communities, businesses and residents to address
the water crisis within Cambridge and the wider region, and ·
To take a full and active part in that work ourselves and employ our “soft power” fully (1) Declare recognition of the water emergency and the local impact this
could have on the residents, communities and businesses we serve; (2) Help reduce over-abstraction by: ·
Giving full weight in planning applications for
large-scale developments to the evidence of the Environment Agency as statutory
consultee on water issues ·
Writing to the Rt Hon Angela Rayner to request the
withdrawal or amendment of the 8 May 2024 WMS (“Written Ministerial Statement”)
on the Cambridge Delivery Group to be replaced with a new WMS requiring greater
priority to be given to water issues in considering any local planning
applications ·
Writing to the Rt Hon Angela Rayner to request that
planning matters in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire remain under the control
of the local authorities ·
Requiring the highest water efficiency standards
for any new developments that are approved, including mandatory greywater
collection and recycling; ·
Undertaking a public information/education
programme within the next year to encourage residents to use less water, using
all communications mechanisms ·
Continuing to engage with the water companies,
alongside expert community groups, to accelerate solutions to over-abstraction,
supporting those that are strategically planned, clearly costed and
transparent, and compatible with commitments to reach net zero and halt
biodiversity loss; ·
Putting pressure on the water companies to take
more concerted, urgent and innovative action to: o
cap abstraction from the Chalk aquifer at today’s
actual levels; o
manage demand more effectively through actions such
as the prompt declaration of hosepipe bans, the accelerated introduction of
universal metering and proactive encouragement of water collection and
recycling e.g. water butt installation; o
rapidly increase efforts to repair leaks. (3) Reduce pollution by ·
supporting the public’s pressure on Anglian Water
to invest urgently in updating its smaller, older sewage treatment works and to
halt illegal dumping of sewage into rivers.
All wastewater installations and infrastructure that discharges into
chalk streams and rivers should be upgraded to this end. (4) Mitigate flooding by: ·
pushing for the prioritisation of nature-based
solutions, including restoration of flood plain habitats and appropriate
vegetation management to slow down surface run-off, reduce the risk of flash
flooding and minimise pollution; ·
promoting the concept of, and principles behind the
‘sponge’ city and region approach: i.e. the creation of places with multiple
areas of greenery, trees, ponds, soakaways, pocket parks, rain gardens and
permeable paving to allow water to drain away, and with measures to store
rainwater and runoff (e.g. water butts). BACKGROUND INFORMATION The erratic weather patterns, generated by climate change, are well
understood on paper by both the Cambridge Water Scarcity Group and the water
companies. Cambridge Water, the water supply company for the city and parts of
South Cambridgeshire, notes in its 2025-2030 business plan[1]
that “we are likely to see more extremes of weather, with 60% less rainfall
in the summer and 30% more rainfall in the winter in our Cambridge region by
the 2080s.” In its draft Water Resource Management Plan, the company
acknowledges clearly that, with current growth proposals and the need for
licence caps on abstraction to protect the natural environment, the region will
run into a water deficit by 2029/30. Current plans for addressing this are wholly inadequate, and
incompatible with the February 2024 government ‘guidance’ on water scarcity[2]. Plans for
large- scale development will increase the burden, causing over-abstraction and
pollution with negative impacts on the quality of life for residents and
further threats to our chalk streams, trees and natural vegetation as the water
table falls and becomes more polluted.
Information provided by the City Council on the water crisis is minimal:
hidden within its webpage on recycling[3] References: [1]
https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/111577/7/Scientific%20Report%20UK%20Storms.pdf [1]
https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/biodiversity-emergency [1]
https://democracy.cambridge.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=21684 [1]
https://www.south-staffs-water.co.uk/about-us/our-strategies-and-plans/business-plan-2025-2030 [1]
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/addressing-water-scarcity-in-greater-cambridge-update-on-government-measures/addressing-water-scarcity-in-greater-cambridge-update-on-government-measures [1]
https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/reduce-your-waste Written
statements - Written questions, answers and statements - UK Parliament Councillor Thornburrow proposed
and Councillor Porrer seconded the following amendment to motion (deleted text
struck through and additional text underlined): This Council notes with concern the rapidly accelerating water crisis
that we are facing and it further notes that, following the declarations of
a climate emergency and a biodiversity emergency in 2019, actions have been
taken across the Council in relation to this issue, many in partnership with South
Cambridgeshire District Council as
part of our Shared Planning service, including: ·
Responding to public questions with the Water
Crisis Forum 2019 ·
An Integrated Water Management Study - the
Stantec Report 2020 ·
The Greater Cambridge Chalk Streams Report
2020 ·
A Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 2021 ·
The Council Rivers, Safe Swimming and Sewage
Motion 2022 ·
The Council Stop Dumping Sewage in our River
and Chalk Streams Motion 2023 ·
A Water awareness campaign in 2022 ·
A Biodiversity Strategy 2022 – 2030 ·
Appointment of Chalk Stream Officer 2023 ·
A Designated Bathing Water area of the Cam
2024 And work to ensure
that our emerging shared local plan has the highest proposed standards of water
sustainability measures, including drainage, grey and rain
water reuse. Council resolves to
continue to provide support for
the ongoing work of the Water Scarcity Group in both its focus on new supply
side measures to ensure timely progress with new pipelines and reservoirs for
new sustainable developments, and also to ensure that future measures for water
credits, grey and rain water recycling and
retrofitting linked to new and existing developments in and around the Greater
Cambridge area are robust and evidenced. Council also resolves to hold Cambridge Water and Anglian Water to
their commitment to a public
information/education programme that will help
residents and businesses use less water. Council believes that, within the powers available to
us, we are responding to the water emergency that faces us, working to ensure the sustainable
development of thriving communities in Cambridge. Council therefore
resolves to continue to do so, confident that the newly
elected Labour government will
provide legislative, practical and financial support for local authorities as we deal with these pressing issues.
The amendment was carried by 30 votes in favour to 4 against. Resolved (by 30 votes in favour to 0 against with 4 abstentions) that: This Council notes
with concern the rapidly accelerating water crisis that we are facing and it further notes that, following the declarations of a climate
emergency and a biodiversity emergency in 2019, actions have been taken across the
Council in relation to this issue, many in partnership with South Cambridgeshire
District Council as part of our
Shared Planning service, including: ·
Responding to public questions with the Water Crisis
Forum 2019 ·
An Integrated Water Management Study - the Stantec Report
2020 ·
The Greater Cambridge Chalk Streams Report 2020 ·
A Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 2021 ·
The Council Rivers, Safe Swimming and Sewage Motion 2022 ·
The Council Stop Dumping Sewage in our River and Chalk
Streams Motion 2023 ·
A Water awareness campaign in 2022 ·
A Biodiversity Strategy 2022 – 2030 ·
Appointment of Chalk Stream Officer 2023 ·
A Designated Bathing Water area of the Cam 2024 And work to ensure
that our emerging shared local plan has the highest proposed standards of water
sustainability measures, including drainage, grey and rain
water reuse. Council resolves to
continue to provide support for the ongoing work of the Water Scarcity Group in
both its focus on new supply side measures to ensure timely progress with new
pipelines and reservoirs for new sustainable developments, and also to ensure
that future measures for water credits, grey and rain water
recycling and retrofitting linked to new and existing developments in and
around the Greater Cambridge area are robust and evidenced. Council also resolves to hold Cambridge Water and Anglian Water to their
commitment to a public
information/education programme that will
help residents and businesses
use less water. Council believes that, within the powers available to us, we are
responding to the water emergency that faces us, working to ensure the sustainable
development of thriving communities in Cambridge. Council therefore
resolves to continue to do so, confident that the newly elected Labour government will provide legislative, practical and financial support for local authorities as we deal with these pressing issues. [1]
https://www.south-staffs-water.co.uk/about-us/our-strategies-and-plans/business-plan-2025-2030 [2] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/addressing-water-scarcity-in-greater-cambridge-update-on-government-measures/addressing-water-scarcity-in-greater-cambridge-update-on-government-measures [3] https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/reduce-your-waste |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Davey - Cambridge: Our Vision Council notes: ·
Cambridge is a vitally
important city both to the region and to the country’s regeneration. There has always
been government interest and investment in the Cambridge area, from Harold
Wilson to Gordon Brown and more recently former Secretary of State Michael
Gove’s 2050 proposals. ·
The City Council has
and will continue to play an essential role in the running of the city,
providing important democratic governance and local decision making. ·
With renewed interest
in the city, including from the new Labour government, it is important that the
Council establishes its own vision for Cambridge’s future, one which is led by
residents, workers and businesses here. ·
The Council’s current
vision was written and adopted in 2014/15, following Labour taking over control
of the Council. Since then, the city has seen significant change, as it has
continued to grow rapidly, and become more diverse. ·
Cambridge and the
council have lived through Brexit, Covid, cost of living crises and the impacts
of conflict around the world. ·
This vision has been
informed by conversations with residents about what matters most to them now
and in the future; by councillors in their roles as community champions; and by
our staff and partners. This includes the ‘Rich Picture’, ‘State of the City’
and the ‘Cambridge Conversations’ led by Executive Councillors. ·
The vision is
high-level and accessible. Many council strategies, delivery plans and targets
fall out of the vision and will be further developed and refined, ideally with
partners and communities, to help shape a new corporate plan from 2025-2030. Council believes: ·
This vision reflects
the values, aspirations and needs of our local communities based on these
conversations and ongoing collaborations. ·
This vision will help
the council in conversations about the future of Cambridge. It will enable us
to represent the views of our citizens and to assert the city’s future needs in
discussions we have with our partners and our recently elected Labour government. Council resolves: ·
To adopt the Vision
statement which positions the Council as a place maker, convenor and community
facilitator as well as playing a core role in providing public services. ·
To promote our vision
and ambition for the future of Cambridge, building on our vision for One
Cambridge, Fair for All, to underpin and direct the work of the council and our
partnerships including the emerging Local Plan and Cambridge 2050. Cambridge: Our Vision One Cambridge, Fair for All Where: · Residents enjoy a high quality of life and exemplar public
services. Cambridge is a place of high
employment where everyone has a warm, safe, and affordable home, and beautiful
open spaces to enjoy. Communities are thriving and empowered, supported by
well-run public services, and drawing on shared prosperity with greater
equality in health and educational outcomes. · Decarbonisation and sustainability are central to prosperity. Cambridge is a net zero carbon city, where people and nature enjoy a clean river, clean air, and biodiverse green spaces. Strong nature networks are coordinated between relevant bodies to combat the impacts of social and climate ... view the full agenda text for item 24/73/CNL Minutes: Councillor Gilderdale proposed and Councillor Moore seconded the following motion: Council
notes: ·
Cambridge is a vitally important city both to the
region and to the country’s regeneration. There has always been government
interest and investment in the Cambridge area, from Harold Wilson to Gordon
Brown and more recently former Secretary of State Michael Gove’s 2050
proposals. ·
The City Council has and will continue to play an
essential role in the running of the city, providing important democratic
governance and local decision making. ·
With renewed interest in the city, including from
the new Labour government, it is important that the Council establishes its own
vision for Cambridge’s future, one which is led by residents, workers and
businesses here. ·
The Council’s current vision was written and
adopted in 2014/15, following Labour taking over control of the Council. Since
then, the city has seen significant change, as it has continued to grow
rapidly, and become more diverse. ·
Cambridge and the council have lived through
Brexit, Covid, cost of living crises and the impacts of conflict around the
world. ·
This vision has been informed by conversations
with residents about what matters most to them now and in the future; by
councillors in their roles as community champions; and by our staff and
partners. This includes the ‘Rich Picture’, ‘State of the City’ and the
‘Cambridge Conversations’ led by Executive Councillors. ·
The vision is high-level and accessible. Many
council strategies, delivery plans and targets fall out of the vision and will
be further developed and refined, ideally with partners and communities, to
help shape a new corporate plan from 2025-2030. Council
believes: ·
This vision reflects the values, aspirations and
needs of our local communities based on these conversations and ongoing
collaborations. ·
This vision will help the council in
conversations about the future of Cambridge. It will enable us to represent the
views of our citizens and to assert the city’s future needs in discussions we
have with our partners and our recently elected Labour government. Council
resolves: ·
To adopt the Vision statement which positions the
Council as a place maker, convenor and community facilitator as well as playing
a core role in providing public services. ·
To promote our vision and ambition for the future
of Cambridge, building on our vision for One Cambridge, Fair for All, to
underpin and direct the work of the council and our partnerships including the
emerging Local Plan and Cambridge 2050. Cambridge:
Our Vision One
Cambridge, Fair for All Where: ·
Residents enjoy a high quality of life and
exemplar public services. Cambridge is a place of high employment
where everyone has a warm, safe, and affordable home, and beautiful open spaces
to enjoy. Communities are thriving and empowered, supported by well-run public
services, and drawing on shared prosperity with greater equality in health and
educational outcomes. ·
Decarbonisation and sustainability are central to
prosperity. Cambridge is a net zero carbon city, where people and nature enjoy
a clean river, clean air, and biodiverse green spaces. Strong nature networks
are coordinated between relevant bodies to combat the impacts of social and
climate injustice. ·
Innovation benefits people and planet. Cambridge
champions pioneering discoveries which shape a better future for people and
planet. There is a lifelong citywide commitment to learning which enables every
resident to develop their skills and fulfil their potential. Businesses are key
to the success of a thriving local economy which benefits residents and
workers. ·
Development is sustainable and inclusive. High-quality
social housing, sustainable public transport alongside key infrastructure is
prioritised to ensure Cambridge is a vibrant and caring city. Cambridge’s
beautiful architecture and public realm, with well-used community spaces,
promote pride and wellbeing and is accessible to all. ·
Arts, sports, and culture are thriving. Cambridge
celebrates the city’s diversity through a vibrant arts and cultural scene,
including music, festivals, sports, and food and drink. Accessible arts, sports
and culture provide spaces for people of all ages to come together to enjoy the
city, both during the day and at night. ·
Democratic accountability is genuine and
accessible. Residents actively participate in democratic life and transparent
decisions are made by and for the people of Cambridge. There is genuine
partnership between academic, business, and civic communities to enhance
residents’ prosperity. Local control, devolution, and community empowerment are
championed through transparent and simplified local government. Resolved (by 19 votes in favour to 0
against with 15 abstentions) to support the motion. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor A.Smith - TUC Volunteer Charter: Strengthening Relations Between Paid Staff and Volunteers This Council Notes: 1. The
key role volunteering plays both locally and nationally.[1] 2. Our gratitude
to the many thousands of volunteers that do so much to enhance our city and,
particularly, to support the most vulnerable. Our equal gratitude to our staff,
who work so tirelessly for our council and our city. 3. The
impact that the economic downturn and the cost-of-living crisis have had on our
paid and voluntary sectors[2]. 4. The
importance of sound core principles in enhancing relations between paid staff
and volunteers. 5. That volunteering
helps build social capital and community cohesion and plays an important role
in the delivery of key public services. But that volunteers should not be a
substitute for paid staff. This Council Resolves to: 1. Affirm
and adopt the TUC Volunteer charter principles as set out below. 2. Use
these principles as a guide to review our more detailed policies and
procedures, which reflect our local needs and circumstances. To do this in
discussion with local union representatives and volunteering managers. 3. Encourage
partner organisations to do the same, to make sure paid staff are protected and
volunteers supported. TUC Volunteer Charter[3] Preamble This Charter sets out the key principles on which volunteering is
organised and how good relations between paid staff and volunteers are built.
It has been developed jointly by Volunteering England (VE) and the Trades Union
Congress (TUC) and has been endorsed by the wider volunteering and trade union
movements. Its starting point is that volunteering plays an essential role in the
economic and social fabric of the UK. It is estimated that some 22 million
people volunteer each year, contributing around £23 billion to the economy.
Volunteering helps build social capital and community cohesion and plays an
important role in the delivery of key public services. Volunteering is also
good for the volunteer: it helps improve health and wellbeing and provides
opportunities for individuals to acquire skills and knowledge that can enhance
career development or employment prospects. This Charter demonstrates the value and importance that both
organisations place on voluntary activity and the time, skills and commitment
given by volunteers. This Charter recognises that voluntary action and trade unionism share
common values. Both are founded on the principles of mutuality and reciprocity,
leading to positive changes in the workplace and community. The trade union
movement itself is built on the involvement and engagement of volunteers. Volunteering England and the TUC acknowledge that on
the whole, relations between paid staff and volunteers are harmonious
and mutually rewarding. They can, however, be enhanced by good procedures,
clarity of respective roles, mutual trust and support.
This Charter sets out the key principles to help underpin good relations in the
workplace. These principles should be used as a guide by individual organisations
to develop more detailed policies and procedures, which reflect local needs and
circumstances. This should be done, wherever possible, between local union
representatives, employers and volunteering managers. Paid work is any activity that ... view the full agenda text for item 24/73/CNLa Minutes: Councillor A.Smith proposed and Councillor Nestor seconded the following motion: This Council Notes: 1.
The key role volunteering
plays both locally and nationally.[1] 2.
Our gratitude to the many thousands
of volunteers that do so much to enhance our city and, particularly, to support
the most vulnerable. Our equal gratitude to our staff, who work so tirelessly
for our council and our city. 3.
The impact that the economic
downturn and the cost-of-living crisis have had on our paid and voluntary
sectors[2]. 4.
The importance of sound core
principles in enhancing relations between paid staff and volunteers. 5.
That volunteering helps
build social capital and community cohesion and plays an important role in the
delivery of key public services. But that volunteers should not be a substitute
for paid staff. This Council Resolves to: 1.
Affirm and adopt the TUC
Volunteer charter principles as set out below. 2.
Use these principles as a
guide to review our more detailed policies and procedures, which reflect our
local needs and circumstances. To do this in discussion with local union
representatives and volunteering managers. 3.
Encourage partner organisations
to do the same, to make sure paid staff are protected and volunteers supported. TUC Volunteer Charter[3] Preamble This Charter sets out the key principles on which volunteering is
organised and how good relations between paid staff and volunteers are built.
It has been developed jointly by Volunteering England (VE) and the Trades Union
Congress (TUC) and has been endorsed by the wider volunteering and trade union
movements. Its starting point is that volunteering plays an essential role in the
economic and social fabric of the UK. It is estimated that some 22 million
people volunteer each year, contributing around £23 billion to the economy.
Volunteering helps build social capital and community cohesion and plays an
important role in the delivery of key public services. Volunteering is also
good for the volunteer: it helps improve health and wellbeing and provides
opportunities for individuals to acquire skills and knowledge that can enhance
career development or employment prospects. This Charter demonstrates the value and importance that both
organisations place on voluntary activity and the time, skills and commitment
given by volunteers. This Charter recognises that voluntary action and trade unionism share
common values. Both are founded on the principles of mutuality and reciprocity,
leading to positive changes in the workplace and community. The trade union
movement itself is built on the involvement and engagement of volunteers. Volunteering England and the TUC acknowledge that on
the whole, relations between paid staff and volunteers are harmonious
and mutually rewarding. They can, however, be enhanced by good procedures,
clarity of respective roles, mutual trust and support. This Charter sets out
the key principles to help underpin good relations in the workplace. These principles should be used as a guide by individual organisations
to develop more detailed policies and procedures, which reflect local needs and
circumstances. This should be done, wherever possible, between local union
representatives, employers and volunteering managers. Paid work is any activity that is undertaken at the direction of an
employer and is financially compensable. Volunteering is freely undertaken and not for financial gain; it
involves the commitment of time and energy for the benefit of society and the
community. Charter Principles 1.
All volunteering is
undertaken by choice, and all individuals should have their right to volunteer,
or indeed not to volunteer; 2.
While volunteers should not
normally receive or expect financial rewards for their activities, they should
receive reasonable out of pocket expenses; 3.
The involvement of
volunteers should complement and supplement the work of paid staff, and should
not be used to displace paid staff or undercut their pay and conditions of service; 4.
The added value of
volunteers should be highlighted as part of commissioning or grantmaking process but their
involvement should not be used to reduce contract costs; 5.
Effective structures should
be put in place to support and develop volunteers and the activities they
undertake, and these should be fully considered and costed when services are
planned and developed; 6.
Volunteers and paid staff should
be provided with opportunities to contribute to the development of volunteering
policies and procedures; 7.
Volunteers, like paid staff,
should be able to carry out their duties in safe, secure and healthy
environments that are free from harassment, intimidation, bullying, violence
and discrimination; 8.
All paid workers and
volunteers should have access to appropriate training and development; 9.
There should be recognised
machinery for the resolution of any problems between organisations and
volunteers or between paid staff and volunteers; 10. In
the interests of harmonious relations between volunteers and paid staff,
volunteers should not be used to undertake the work of paid staff during
industrial disputes. This Charter stands between Volunteering England and the TUC as a
statement of principles and good practice. It is also a model for use by
individual unions, volunteer involving organisations in the public, third and
private sectors and other bodies in discussions around the use of volunteers. Resolved (by 23 votes in favour to 0 against with 10 abstentions) to support the motion. [1] According to Support Cambridgeshire’s 2023
State of the Sector Survey, approximately 2,100 charities operate in
Cambridgeshire. These charities employ an estimated 5,300 people, with over
30,000 volunteers and nearly 11,000 trustees recorded with the Charity
Commission. This does not include the many more people who give of their time
through mutual aid. [2] Support Cambridge’s 2023 State of the
Sector Survey highlighted issues in the local voluntary sector. Increasingly,
the voluntary sector is struggling to both recruit volunteers, trustees and
staff. Lack of funding was the biggest issue raised. [3] Source,
https://www.tuc.org.uk/research-analysis/reports/charter-strengthening-relations-between-paid-staff-and-volunteers
(2009) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Written questions No discussion will take place on this
item. Members will be asked to note the written questions and answers document as
circulated around the Chamber.
Minutes: The Mayor advised that no written questions had been received. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To Note Record of Urgent Officer Decision |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Appointment of Councillor representatives to the Conservators of the River Cam. Minutes: The decision was noted. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Notification of Appointment of S.151 Officer Minutes: The appointment of Jody Etherington as the Council’s Section 151 Officer was noted. |