Agenda

The Issue

Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP), Cambridgeshire County Council, Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council

 

Born in Cambridge and having lived here all my life, I've watched our city change enormously. Change is inevitable, and many improvements have benefited Cambridge. But many residents now feel that the overall direction of transport, planning and development is making the city harder to access, harder to move around and less practical for the people who live, work and visit here.

 

Cambridge is one of the world's leading centres for education, science and innovation, and that success should be celebrated. But Cambridge is not London. We do not have an Underground network or the transport infrastructure of a major capital city. Many residents, carers, tradespeople, workers, families and visitors still rely on roads for everyday life.

 

The question is whether Cambridge's growth is being managed in a way that properly considers all the people who depend on the city every day.

 

This petition is about the bigger picture

This petition calls for a full independent review of the overall impact of transport policies, planning decisions and major developments on the future of Cambridge.

 

Many individual schemes and developments have been considered separately over the years. But many residents are asking a much bigger question:

 

Has anyone independently looked at the combined effect of all these changes on Cambridge?

 

The impact on congestion, accessibility, local businesses, parking, roads and pavements, public services, housing, community life and the character of the city should not simply be looked at one scheme at a time.

 

This petition is about looking at the bigger picture.

 

Who are the people signing?

One thing that has struck me while speaking to people who have signed this petition is the wide range of ordinary local people behind it.

 

There are shop workers, NHS staff, retired people, parents, tradespeople, office workers and people in professional and well-paid jobs. They have different backgrounds, different priorities and different political views.

 

Some may have voted Green, Liberal Democrat, Conservative, Reform or Labour. Some may not have voted at all.

 

This is not about party politics.

 

These are people living and working in Cambridge who are seeing the changes around them first-hand and have genuine concerns about the future of their city.

 

Most have busy lives, families and other commitments. They are not transport planners or council experts, and they should not need to spend hours trying to understand complicated council processes simply to have their concerns heard.

 

Their everyday experience of Cambridge matters too.

 

What are people concerned about?

Many residents are concerned about:

 

Increasing congestion and ongoing changes to the road network.

The loss of affordable and accessible shops, forcing more local people to travel to surrounding towns for everyday shopping.

Independent retailers struggling while the city centre offers fewer reasons for local people to shop there.

Increasing numbers of retail premises being replaced by offices and laboratories, changing the balance and purpose of the city centre.

Large-scale housing developments placing additional pressure  ...  view the full agenda text for item 5.

Final recommendations to be tabled following Cabinet on 23 September.

 

Full Cabinet report attached.

Final recommendations to be tabled following Cabinet on 23 September.

 

Cabinet report attached.

Final recommendations to be tabled following Cabinet on 23 September.

 

Cabinet report attached.

Council notes

That Cambridge is a diverse city and that Black, Asian and other ethnic-minority communities make a significant contribution to the life, culture and economy of Cambridge.

 

That the Council supported the Black Lives Matter motion in July 2020 and recognises the significant work undertaken since then to address racial inequality, including workforce equality monitoring, engagement with staff and communities, and the development of the Race Equality Toolkit.

 

That the Council endorsed the UNISON Anti-Racism Charter in October 2025 and signed the Charter in January 2026, building on work already undertaken by the Council to promote racial equality within its workforce. The Charter includes commitments relating to workforce and ethnicity pay-gap reporting, anti-racism training, recruitment and promotion, and monitoring disciplinary and grievance outcomes.

 

That the Council's 2024/25 Equality in Employment Workforce Report demonstrates progress in some areas, including increased ethnic-minority representation among employees, apprentices and those receiving promotions. It also shows that ethnic-minority representation changes at different stages of the recruitment process.

 

That differences in representation at different stages of recruitment do not, by themselves, demonstrate discrimination. However, significant or persistent disparities should prompt the Council to understand whether barriers exist and whether existing measures are effective.

 

That legitimate scrutiny, political debate, journalism and freedom of expression are fundamental to a democratic society, while bullying, harassment, discriminatory abuse, intimidation and threats should not be confused with legitimate scrutiny.

 

Council believes

That the progress made since 2020 should be recognised and welcomed.

 

That commitments to racial equality are most meaningful when they result in measurable improvements in people's experiences and opportunities.

 

That the next stage should therefore be to move from commitment and representation towards measurable outcomes, action and accountability, building on the work already being undertaken by the Council.

 

That equality of opportunity does not mean lowering standards. It means ensuring that everyone has a fair opportunity to demonstrate their skills, experience and ability, with consistent and proportionate standards applied fairly.

 

That tackling racial inequality requires both good quality data and meaningful engagement with the people affected by inequality.

 

Council resolves

1.         Strengthen accountability for existing commitments

 

To build on the Council's Anti-Racism Charter, Equality in Employment reporting and Inclusion and Equity Panel work by introducing a clearer annual assessment of progress on racial equality.

 

Using existing data wherever possible, and subject to legal requirements and appropriate statistical safeguards, the assessment should identify significant or persistent disparities across the employment journey, including:

• recruitment and appointment;
• progression and promotion;
• training and development;
• representation at senior levels;
• pay;
• disciplinary and grievance outcomes; and
• retention and departures.

 

2.         Turn evidence into action

 

Where significant or persistent disparities are identified, the Council should adopt an "identify, analyse, act and evaluate" approach:

 

Identify the disparity -> Analyse possible causes -> Act to address potential barriers -> Evaluate whether the action worked.

 

Where appropriate and proportionate to the issue identified, the annual assessment should identify:

• the issue or disparity identified;
• the evidence considered;
• the action proposed or taken;
• the service or team responsible;
• the timescale  ...  view the full agenda text for item 9a

Herbicide-Free Weed Management

 

Council notes:

 

• That Cambridge Liberal Democrats called for the Council to adopt and trial herbicide-free weed management, both through the declaration of a Biodiversity Emergency in 2019 and through a motion proposing trials in two wards in 2021.

 

• That the Liberal Democrat motion received unanimous Council support and was welcomed by local environmental organisations and community groups.

 

• The important contribution made by Pesticide Free Cambridge and others in developing and supporting Cambridge’s herbicide-free ambition.

 

• That the trials demonstrated the environmental benefits of reducing herbicide use, but also identified significant operational challenges associated with replacing chemical treatment with mechanical and manual methods.

 

• That mechanical and manual weed removal is more labour-intensive, is affected by weather, seasonal growth, parked vehicles and accumulated detritus, and requires repeat visits because it does not prevent regrowth.

 

• That, following the trials and investment in specialist equipment, the Council moved to extend herbicide-free weed management across the city.

 

• That, since then, implementation has been slow, reflecting the difficult and time-consuming nature of herbicide-free weed removal and the need to tackle years of accumulated detritus alongside the visible growth. Consequently, a substantial number of areas are still awaiting treatment, and residents are understandably concerned about the condition of streets and public spaces.

 

• That responsibility for weed management is divided between Cambridge City Council, Cambridgeshire County Council and other landowners, requiring stronger coordination and clearer information for residents.

 

 

 

Council believes:

 

• That the Council-led ambition to end the routine use of herbicides remains the right approach for Cambridge and should not be abandoned because its implementation has proved more difficult than anticipated.

 

• That herbicide-free weed management supports the Council’s commitments to biodiversity, environmental protection and more sustainable management of public spaces.

 

• That environmental ambition must be matched by effective implementation, sufficient resources, suitable equipment and an honest assessment of what is required to deliver the service successfully.

 

• That Cambridge residents are entitled to streets and public spaces that are safe, accessible, properly maintained and attractive.

 

• That priority must be given to weed growth that obstructs footways, affects accessibility, restricts drainage, creates a safety concern or risks damage to highways and other infrastructure.

 

• That some vegetation can be tolerated where it does not affect safety, accessibility, drainage, infrastructure or the reasonable enjoyment of public space.

 

• That residents should be given clear information about the standards they can expect from an herbicide-free service, including the greater likelihood of seasonal growth and regrowth between treatments.

 

• That the present difficulties require decisive corrective action and additional support for the service, rather than any retreat from the Council’s herbicide-free commitment.

 

Council therefore calls on the Leader and Executive Councillor to:

 

• Reaffirm the Council’s commitment to the Liberal Democrat-led ambition of ending the routine use of herbicides on land managed by the City Council.

 

 

• Commission an urgent officer review of the current weed-management programme, identifying:
• the reasons for departure from the original programme;
• the extent of the outstanding work;
• the staffing, equipment and financial capacity required;
• the effectiveness and whole-life cost of the  ...  view the full agenda text for item 9b

As residents of Cambridge, City Councillors experience the impact of roadworks first hand, whether we are walking, cycling, using public transport or driving. We know that this causes frustration and delays, adds to the costs for businesses, makes parents late to pick up children, or simply adds to the friction of daily life.  While proper maintenance of the city’s infrastructure is vital, with better planning and clearer information at least some of the burden could be reduced. However, it appears that the County Council has no interest in limiting the impact of utility works and its own scheduled works on the residents of Cambridge, despite our significance within Cambridgeshire.

 

The purpose of this motion is to create a closer working relationship between City and County Councils with a view to managing the process more effectively. It will also support the planned creation of a unitary authority.

 

This Council notes:

•       Cambridge City Council receives regular roadworks bulletins, including 50 planned works and 18 full road closures between 16–30 September.

•       These works affect roads, pavements and cycleways.

•       There is currently no comprehensive modelling of how cumulative works and closures impact congestion, movement across the city, bus reliability, or air quality.

 

This Council believes:

•       Robust data gathering, modelling and impact analysis are essential for effective transport planning.

•       Uncoordinated closures without clear assessment place unnecessary strain on residents, public transport operators and businesses, and worsen air quality.

 

This Council resolves:

•       To write to Cambridgeshire County Council, as Highway Authority, requesting full liaison with Cambridge City Council and the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority to ensure:

1.      Systematic data gathering and impact analysis of roadworks and closures, shared between authorities.

2.      Integration of this data into current and future transport and infrastructure planning.

 

•       To request continued liaison with the CPCA on the best use of this data for forward planning.

Council notes that millions of pounds of public money are currently being committed through the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP), with limited transparency and scrutiny.

 

Council believes that significant expenditure decisions should be subject to appropriate democratic oversight and that elected members should have the opportunity to consider and approve major projects involving substantial public expenditure.

 

Council therefore resolves that, from the date of this motion, the Council's appointed board member on the Greater Cambridge Partnership shall not vote in favour of any GCP project involving expenditure of £100,000 or more unless that project has first been considered by Full Council.

 

Council further resolves that the relevant officer(s) shall establish an appropriate process to ensure that proposals meeting this threshold are brought before Full Council for consideration before the Council's board member is required to vote on them.