We are now live. Thank you. Welcome to this meeting of South Cambridge district council. My name is counsellor Peter Fein, I am the chair of council. My vice chair, counsellor Peter Sanford, on my left here. This meeting is being live streamed and recorded. We also allow other recordings filming and photography So long as the meeting is not disrupted. Wedi yw'r rhif, rydym ni i'r ffan yn sielodd, a dyw'r cyfrif oherwydd i chi eisiau hwnnw wedi'w gael hwnnw i gyfrif o'r ymhawr. Cymru mae'n ei dynnu i chi ei ffaint o hyd yn y dynnu a'u cyfrif o'r rhanig iawn y ddrygu gyda'i. Aeth ddysgu'r rhif yn ei ddrygu gŷn i'u cyfrif o'r rhanig iawn a ddefnyddio'r rhif, rydym ni'n mwy o'r rhif yn ddrygu o'r rhif. a then when, you finish addressing the meeting please turn your microphone and camera of. Members attending remotely should indicate their wish to speak through a chat message in the teams meeting, those in the chamber should indicate their wish to speak by raising their hand, and I will ask Vice-Chair to note the order of speakers. The chat facility should not be used for any other purposes. Unless possibly right down a simple amendment, any complex amendments Thank you, Chair. We have apologies from councillors Herbrow, Wilson, Beigott, Halings, Hart, Van Devend, Osborne, Hailes, Jacksonwood, Warren Green and Ribbill. Thank you, our members were of any other apologies that have been submitted. And are any members participating remotely? We have councillor Tumi Hawkins joining online. Thank you. Felly, mae gennym i gael gan ddechrau'r berthynas ac mae'n meddwl i'ch gael'r ddweud o'r byth yn ffwrdd y bydd y cyhoedd, oherwydd, oherwydd, a'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r byd ar y cyhoedd yn ei ddweud. A fyddwn i gael ddechrau'r berthynas yw yma, mae'n meddwl i'ch gael gan gael, ac mae'n meddwl i'ch gael ddechrau a'r ddweud y meddwl i'ch meddwl i'ch gael. So, declarations of interest, do we have any declarations for this meeting? I see none. Councillor Heather Williams. Thank you, Chair. Just there is an item on the Greater Cambridge Partnership, and I remember the assembly. Councillor Stibart. Chair, thank you. So, I'd like to mention that I'm a director of South Cambridgeshire Investment Partnership and also South Cambridgeshire Projects. Thank you. Any others? I see none. So, item three, Registry of Interest. I would just remind members that they need to keep their register up to date and should inform the Democratic Services team of any changes. Item four, Minutes of the previous meeting, that's on pages 11 onwards. Councillor Anna Breddon, do you have an amendment to suggest in these minutes? Yes, I have, Chair. Thank you. It's on behalf of Councillor Shabona Batahtaria because she, at item one, was noted as her apologies had been given, but it hasn't recorded that she's Councillor Dr Shabona Batahtaria. Right. Thank you. Councillor Sue Ellington. On page 13, on the bottom of the page, the against, the vote was held and proposed and amended and were cast as follows. I am not included in the against column and I know I voted against. I'm not included in the favour either, so you have to say I was here and I did something. Noted, thank you. And Councillor Professor Stobod. Thank you, Chair. So, top of page 15 in the agenda pack includes a short statement that I made in the context of the task and finish work. Concerning young people engagement with the council. And it says that, I quote, the council should ask a village college to host a meeting of the Crime and Environment Advisory Committee. Now, I believe I said education institution, but I would like to underline the fact that we did in our discussions in the task and finish group talk about an education institution because it wants to keep the field quite broad. So, I would just ask that the record be corrected to capture that. It doesn't mean that we wouldn't ask a village college, but we just like on the record for it to be, in a sense, set in a wider context. I'm sure the record can be amended to reflect that. Any others? Members, so the question is do we approve these minutes as now amended? Members, are you content to take this decision by affirmation? Great. Any against? No. Anyone wish to abstain on that? No. Incidentally, you don't have to abstain just because you weren't here at that meeting. The council has therefore agreed the approval of the minutes of the last meeting as amended as a correct record. I should say that the minutes of the extraordinary meeting on 20 November have not yet been prepared sufficiently to put to council today, so I'm proposing to put those before the council meeting in February. That's acceptable to members. We then move to item 5A, announcements from the chair. I have only one announcement, which follows on from an announcement I made previously, that we will be having a small, we have set up a small working group to take forward the arrangements for the 50th anniversary celebration of the formation of this council, which will take place next spring probably in April. I should be able to refer us to that. Working group will meet on 7 November, so if any members want to speak to me about it before then. Then it will report to the Civic Affairs Committee, which meets on the 14th. I think probably it will meet on 7 December, that seems a better idea. I will report to the Civic Affairs Committee on 14 December. I have no other announcements. Item 5B, announcements from the leader and cabinet. Do you have any announcements, leader? Yes, please. Thank you very much, chair. Good afternoon, members. Just a few. Just to mention that civil parking enforcement, which was very much a cross-party bit of work to get it stimulated, but also working with GCP who put huge efforts into this, we finally got it across the line. This is something that our residents will be delighted about, I think, fairly universally, so well done to all concerned with that, officers and members. Just want to say thank you very much to the members of the climate team, in particular, all of Luke Alex and Eleanor for arranging the Climate Action Conference this week in Cotundam. It was held there, really, in memory of Councillor Lockhood, who died about this time last year. It was a roaring success. We had massive turnout of people and the speakers were inspirational. It was a fantastic bit of work on installing EV charging in a relatively small village. So, lots of learning there. I hope it's something that we repeat. So, great news. Very, very proud of what was achieved there. And then just finally at the combined authority board yesterday, the local transport and connectivity plan was finally passed. So that means that we can all get on with delivering the infrastructure improvements that are so badly needed. Thank you. Thank you, leader. Personally, I'm very glad here of the universal welcome for the introduction of traffic wardens within the district. I'm sure it will be correct on that. Announcements from the Head of Paid Service. I've seen none. Questions from the public. We come to item six, Questions of the Public. Just like to remind speakers under this item that any questions or statements made by counsellors need to be within the scope of our public speaking theme. We have seen the question and that has been agreed. So, we have received a request to ask a question from Elizabeth Williams. Mr Williams, are you on the, I think you're online. Welcome. Can you hear me? We can hear you clearly, so please proceed with your question. A little bit of background that Saturday the 25th of November just passed was White Ribbon Day. I can see the chair and various members in the chamber are wearing their white ribbons, which is great to see. It's the leading UK charity engaging men and boys to end violence against women and girls. They aim to do this by working with thousands of individuals and organisations to build capacity, educate and raise awareness to bring about change, including through White Ribbon ambassadors and champions accredited organisations and supporter organisations. My question is as follows. In tandem with the council's work on domestic violence and its accreditation with the Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance, does the council have plans to gain accreditation with the leading campaign to prevent violence against women before it starts? White Ribbon engages men and boys to end violence against women and girls. Many local authorities are accredited, including East Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council. Does South Cambridgeshire District Council plan to join them? If so, please advise on progress. If no, please advise why not. Thank you for your question. Leader, I think you wanted to say a few words before asking one of your cabinet to answer this. Yes, if I may. Thank you very much indeed for your question. So even though women are far more frequently, though absolutely not exclusively the victims of domestic abuse and other forms of coercion, many of us, including myself, will have either experienced it ourselves or through friends or family members. And I know, and I'm sure you'd agree, that actually the vast majority of men care about this every bit as much as women do. So I'm very comfortable about passing this on to Councillor John Batchelor, who's our lead member for housing, to give the full answer to this. So thank you and over to you, Councillor Batchelor. Thank you very much, Chair. And thank you for the question. This gives us the opportunity to detail the work that we're doing in this area. So the first thing I'd like to say is that the council is committed to constantly improving the responses to domestic abuse in all its forms. This includes supporting the White Ribbon commitment to end violence towards women and girls. We recognise that domestic abuse can be a gender crime, but we also recognise that both men and women can experience domestic abuse, including physical violence. This is why the council has chosen an accreditation programme which recognises and challenges all forms of domestic abuse. We believe this best supports all our residents experiencing domestic abuse, regardless of their gender, age, religion or sexuality. As part of the council's ongoing commitment to continuing to review and improve its response to domestic violence, we gained domestic abuse accreditation with the Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance in December 2022. In order to gain this accreditation, the council had to develop domestic abuse policies for customers and also develop a staff policy, including support for staff experiencing abuse. All staff receive ongoing domestic abuse training and the council has developed a range of internal and external awareness using campaigns to provide support and advice to survivors and to perpetrators. One example of this is the awareness raising support for survivors and perpetrators which is taken across the district by our refuge vehicles. As you can see on the screen there's a very striking advert to promote this. In addition, as the council was the second local authority in Cambridge to achieve DHA accreditation, we have worked collaboratively with other Cambridge councils to support them towards their own accreditation. This includes sharing our customer and staff policies and our bespoke training plans with other councils, including East Cambridge district council. As part of the DHA accreditation, the council worked closely with specialist domestic abuse organisations and survivors and received positive feedback about the way in which the council supports individuals experiencing domestic abuse. Although there are no plans at present to also obtain white ribbon accreditation, the council's genuine commitment to improve service for people experiencing abuse is evidence through the recent DHA accreditation and the excellent feedback obtained by the creditors and by partner organisations and survivors. The council is also pleased to actively promote the white ribbon message and change the story posters, white ribbons and the white ribbon pledge are already visible across the building and actively shared with staff and councillors. The council's domestic abuse work, including its support for the white ribbon organisation, is overseen by the council's corporate safeguarding group. Mrs Williams, did you want to ask a supplementary to that question? Please, go ahead. Yes please, thank you. It is fantastic to hear about the positive and important work the council is doing in relation to domestic violence through this DHA accreditation and also the support for the white ribbon campaign mentioned. However, I would say I don't feel the final part of my question has really been answered, which was if not seeking to achieve accreditation, why not? And I would also comment that the white ribbon campaign does not centre purely on domestic abuse, but wider forms of violence across society. It seems to me that accreditation with the white ribbon campaign does nothing to detract or conflict from your fantastic domestic violence work. And I've already spoken with a couple of councillors who seemed to support white ribbon accreditation. I suspect there would be widespread support for it across members. Would it not therefore be appropriate to debate that in tandem with discussion perhaps with Cambridge City or East Cambridgeshire, who might support you as you supported them? Councilor Batchelor. Yes, thank you very much for that. Our view is that the accreditation we have is a very broad one and actually does cover what the white ribbon organisation is also promoting. It's also a practical side to this.  We've invested a lot of time doing that with the DHA accreditation and for this moment we feel that that is sufficient. We are fully supportive of the white ribbon activities, but they're not pursuing accreditation in that area at this moment. Thank you Mrs Woodland. You will have noted the last words there at this moment. You will see that we are very committed to white ribbon as a council and I think we would all expect that there will be further discussions about how we can best support that without necessarily seeking accreditation. But that is not a matter for me as Chair, that is a matter for the Cabinet. So thank you very much for asking your question. Thank you. Petitions, item 7. I understand we have no petitions. So we'll move on to item 8. Item 8A, the Licensing Act 2003, the review of our statement of licensing policy, which members you'll find on pages 25 onwards in your printed papers. So I call on the lead Cabinet Member for Environmental Services and Licensing to introduce this report and move the recommendations. Councillor Henry Batchelor. Thank you very much Chair. So just to make members aware the reason this is coming to council today is because as a local authority we are obliged to review our Licensing Act every five years and we're now at that point. What we have in front of us is the edited version but it's worth pointing out that about 99% of what we're looking at is the existing Licensing Act. There are some very small minor changes that we've had to make to keep us in line with legislation. There are also some small changes around grammar, around dates, around office of contact, that kind of thing, just to get it as up to date as possible. Probably worth noting as well this policy change has also been through the Licensing Committee who offered it their support but just to very briefly outline what the changes or revisions are. So in terms of revisions and as I say these are small grammatical changes, nothing changing the actual content of the policy but there are some changes to the updating of the live music exemptions, revision of the cumulative impact statement and temporary event notices and additions that we've made to the policy, again albeit very small, are on the spiking prevention and tackling sexual harassment statement which includes the inclusion of the Ask Angela scheme if members are aware of that. There's also some small additions to the alcohol delivery services and some small additions to the prevention of violence against women and girls within the large scale events and festivals paragraphs which is pretty quite apt given the public question that we've just received. And then final small changes we've made are around the procedure to licensing hearings and again all these changes have been through the Licensing Committee. So on that note I'll ask the Chair of the Licensing Committee if she would be willing to second which is Councillor Bradman. Thank you Chair, I'm very happy to second. All right. Does anyone wish to speak on this item? I see Councillor Bradman. Yes. Anybody else wishes to speak? I'm quite happy to make my comments as a seconder. So I'd like to thank the officers and our legal adviser for their help in making sure that we're up to date for the next five years with this policy and also that we've addressed some issues relating to the procedure for dealing with an opposed club premises licence application. And one of the elements that we have added back into that is a requirement that the environmental health officer should be involved in large events. But broadly speaking we've had very good discussion with the officers and the legal and through committee and we're happy that these reflect our wishes as a council. So thank you very much. Well I see no other speakers on this item. Can I therefore take it that we can approve this by affirmation? Agreed. Any against? Any abstentions? That is approved by affirmation. Thank you members. We then move to item 8B which is the provisional general fund revenue and capital out turn for 2022-23 on pages 61 onwards in your papers. I call on the lead cabinet member for finance to present this report and move the recommendations. Councillor John Williams. Thank you. As the chair has said the recommendations on pages 61-62 they show the out turn is roughly what was predicted journey here and it obviously shows that this council is a very good financial position, a very sound financial position. There's just one thing I would like to draw your attention to, very good news. With regard to capital projects that's on page 74 you'll see that the footway lighting parish maintains street lights renewal programme was actually completed within the two year programme. Obviously that's good news for our parish councils because that means that those parish councils which have south camps lights for which they pay the electricity for would actually help them in the current circumstances of the increasing electricity costs in hope and enable them to keep their electricity costs down as a result of us installing LED lights. So I'm very pleased to be able to move and recommend that council accept the report and the recommendations. Thank you, chair. Thank you. Do you have a seconder for your proposal? Councillor Bridget Smith. I don't need to say the answer. Thank you. Does anyone wish to speak on this item? Councillor Heather Williams. Thank you, chair. And looking through this there are things obviously we would all agree on. I think one thing we've all always agreed on is that if anyone was designing a street light system they would not have what we have in place street lights, a pain in the proverbial on a daily basis for some of us it feels like. That of course is welcome. However to vote on something we would have to be happy with it in its entirety and there's a couple of issues that I think require raising. One of which is I appreciate we're given the combined figure but if we draw our attention to page 63 on the top table the variance on the operational costs I do think is concerning. I appreciate that there has been an explanation given as to why but actually going that far out of our budgeted remit is worrying particularly given that we know and we'll see later on that savings are required. I'd also draw attention to eight recommendation eight C and then if we turn the page to page 65 paragraph 42nd underlined down. One of the things that being asked to do here is to roll over the amounts that haven't been paid into the next year a total of 316,000. One of those things is to continue internal works within the building. Now at the moment chair I do not feel that that's appropriate use of our funds at present. We should be focusing money on spending things to residents and not on our own building so for those reasons I will not be supporting this item. Thank you chair. Council John Williams do you want to speak on that? Yes thank you chair. On the first point as has been pointed out the report explains why we have that over spend in the head of finance department and it is due to the fact that we've paid off contribution to the A14 upgrade earlier than expected. As a result yes we did incur an increase but it has meant that we are paying less than 2.3 million towards that cost. We've saved ourselves by paying earlier we have saved ourselves 2.3 million so it's a bit to suggest that over spend is as we call or maybe over going over costs. It's not quite true and the reason why we have an over spend there is because we have actually paid off something which enables us to make a saving of 2.3 million. I think that should be a point in mind. The other point about money spent on this building of course we are improving the energy efficiency of this building. We have also provided electric charging points for electric vehicles to enable our staff and visitors who have electric vehicles to avail themselves of charging those vehicles but also to encourage the use of electric vehicles. That work has actually contributed towards us and towards our target of reducing our carbon emissions in this council. Again to suggest that we are doing it just for ourselves it's not true we are doing it for our community and doing our bit to help fight climate change. Thank you. I'm going to come next to councillor Brown. Before I do that I believe councillor Williams has appointed information. Yes to clarify what I said. I said about it being an over spend to the budget and the need to be very accurate of our budgeting going forward. I did not make the comments that councillor John Williams referred to it was about the budget difference and also to note that not all improvements have been for greening. We've had a lot of painting of walls, new carpets and the like so I don't think it's a great thing. Sorry to stop you there that is not a point of information on what was said earlier but anyway you managed to give it in. But the first point was generally a point of information for which I'm grateful. Councillor Brown knows. Yes just a couple of points chair and referencing the LED programmes and the suboptimal arrangements for street lighting across the county. To note that the county council is finally catching up with the district council and has an LED upgrade programme so they'll be saving quite a lot of money on running costs from the future. And then more generally I just contrast our own report here with news over the last week or so of the financial troubles at Birmingham and just yesterday those at Nottingham city council. And I would applaud our finance team and my cabinet member for their diligence and success in running a very tight financial shift. Thank you. Councillor Stephen Drew and then I'll come to the leader after that. Thank you. Would I be correct in saying that one of the things that councils are required to do with their finance through government directive is to be as efficient as possible with their resources. And one of the things that government expects councils to do is ensure that they invest in a way that benefits their communities and is also very rigorous. And I am struck by the thought that you have talked about the money that is being spent improving South Cams Hall and Councillor Williams has referred in her point of information to things such as walls and carpets and such like. And I wonder Councillor Williams if you'd like to comment on how far you think the council is meeting the government's expectations to be an efficient and business like council in its work. We are in debate but I'm happy for Councillor John Williams to respond to that. Thank you chair. If the longer you leave things to deteriorate the more costly it is to refurbish and repair them. We have a programme on this council to replace things before they get completely worn out and costly to correct. And so painting walls and laying new carpets may seem frivolous but actually it is very important that we do that to ensure that the fabric of this council building is maintained. We do not get ourselves into a position where it deteriorates so much that we end up having to spend a lot of money correcting it. An example of that is of course the front of this building where we have unexpectedly had to pay out a lot of money in making sure that the front of this building is safe because it has been so long since it was correctly looked after and refurbished. This building has been around now for over 20 years and it's about right that we should be taking this action to bring it up to modern day specifications. Thank you. I think we're getting to the point where we are nearly ready to draw this matter to a conclusion. Before we do that I'd like to, the leader may like to comment on this. Thank you so just building slightly on that I don't want to repeat things. But I've been around long enough that I well remember some robust debate in this chamber under the previous administration over replacing the furniture. I seem to remember that the chairs we have would bite your nether regions when you sat down and the tables were decidedly rickety. I think we're still sitting on those chairs actually that were replaced at that time. Forgive me if I'm wrong about that but I think we are. The difference there was that the council was in somewhat of a parlous financial state at that time which was why there was justification of a debate and had been eeking into its reserves. It was balancing the books through the reserves and the five year plan for balancing the books was to eek away to reserves until there was virtually nothing left. So Councillor Williams has made it perfectly clear that we are in the fortunate position thanks to very, very adept fiscal management to invest in order to save. This building is a very valuable capital asset and if we don't invest in it and give it up to spec then it will deteriorate and the cost when we're forced to do something will exceed the cost of routine maintenance. Having just one other point I sat in Peterborough city council chamber yesterday for six hours nearly dying of cold actually because they need to invest in their heating system to save a lease. Thank you. Thank you. I think I see no other speakers. Can we have this proposed by Council General Williams seconded by Councillor Bridget Smith. Can we take this item by affirmation? Now I think not. So I'm going to proceed directly to a vote. Members will know how the system works. I'm happy to remind any members of that if they need it. But we've just set up the vote and as you know you've pressed the blue button first. Councillor Bradlin, did you need to say something before the vote? Not before the vote but can I say something afterwards? Thank you. Right, we've now moved to the vote on item 8B. So if you're in favour of the motion as proposed you press the green. If you're opposed you press the red and yellow to abstain having pressed the blue button first of course. Has everyone voted who wants to vote? One or two technical issues to be sorted out before I announce the results of that vote if members would bear with us. Can we record an additional vote verbally? Councillor Dobby, are you abstaining on this one? Right, in that case I think we need to take that vote again, I'm afraid. So we'll wipe out the figures on the screen and in a moment we will start the vote again. Just some technical problems to give us, we will try to get it right this time. No, we're going to resolve this first. I usually call a break after about an hour just occasionally we'd like to have a break during the meeting without moving from our seats. This is going to be one of those breaks for a few more minutes.  As Erin says we will now rerun the vote from scratch. Same rules as before please. Right, I gather that the result is as on screen. So that motion is passed by 23 votes to 8 with one abstention. I then propose to move on to item 8C having included 8B. Do you have a point of information or a point of order? Thank you Chair, it's just a point that I believe... Sorry, what sort of a point is it? It's a point of information I think. A point of information, thank you. It's not quite the information. It's just that I believe Councillor Sunita Hansarash who had hope to attend has given her apologies because she is unable to now attend. Thank you for that information. Right, we now move on to item 8C once we've just... Has that vote been taken down? As from the screen, it's still on line. Right, item 8C. I think you will all agree that hearing from me once at a time is plenty. Item 8C, Provisional Housing Revenue Account, out turned for 2022-23. Again, I call on the lead Cabinet Member for Finance to present this report and move the recommendations, Councillor John Williams. Thank you Chair, having dealt with the general fund, we now come on to the housing revenue account and I'm very delighted to move the recommendations on page 77. Thank you Councillor Williams and you have a seconder? Councillor Bridget Smith seconded the motion. Does anyone want to speak on this recommendation? Councillor Heather Williams. Thank you, I'm not sure. Councillor Jim might have picked me to the post but I'll take the spot anyway Chair. Just to say that there are times when we can agree and we should agree when we can and I think on the building of council houses has been something that we've all felt very passionate about. We know it was a difficult decision to actually keep our council housing stock at the time and it's something that I think regardless of party we have a close attachment to. So we will support this as it does enable the carry forward to continue those projects and building council housing. I think Councillor Stephen Drew did you want to speak on this? Thank you very much. I just wanted to ask actually Councillor John Williams a question related to what Councillor Heather Williams has just asked. I was wondering if we could have an update on the progress made by the council towards its council house building targets. Councillor John Williams. Thank you through you Chair. If you look at page 83 there's a table which shows the number of dreadings that we have been completing last year and you'll see that last year we completed 143. Dreadings and 97 of those were social rented dreadings so we continue to develop our housing stock. We have a substantial programme going forward over the next five years to continue to introduce more council stock and to make sure that we have a net increase. In council stock stop taking into account right to buy so I'm very delighted that housing officers and particularly those involved with new build are continuing to identify sites to build. It's very difficult for us to do that because of course we do not have a lot of land unfortunately in South Cams we don't own much land. So we have to be pretty canny in order to build our council housing but we are being very successful in doing that and I thank the officers for their ingenuity in this. Thank you. Councillor Branford and I think you wanted to go ahead. Thank you, Chair. I'd just want to add a local member perspective on this. So in Saarston we've got two significant developments on the side of Bay Bram Road. The first added some 63 council properties to our stock. The second developments on the south is going to add another 47 and that is in addition to the 25 arms houses by John Huntington charity. So we've had something like 132 affordable homes added to the local stock so I'm very grateful for the council's policy in that respect. Right, I see no other speakers on this item. Members, can I ask, can we take this by affirmation? Anyone against any abstentions? No, that is approved by affirmation. Well, councillors were on a bit of a roll here so I hesitate to call that to a halt by calling a brief recession. So no, I'm not talking about a recession am I, that's something different. We may be having one of those as well but that's different. So we'll have a break in a short while but let's deal with item 8D and complete the financial strategy. Medium term financial strategy. Can I call on Luke Cavick member for finance again councillor John Williams? Thank you, Jack. You'll see that over the coming five years we are going to be meeting some challenges. The usual situation applies in that we don't know quite what central government have waiting for us over those five years. We continue to have the fair funding review hanging over us and we therefore must make provision for the possibility of us losing a considerable sum in terms of business rates. We'd be very good actually if you looked at the previous report on the general fund last year. You'll see that we have a pooling arrangement with other councils and we actually did very well out of that pooling arrangement. But even with that in place and with the expectation that that will continue, we are expecting probably in two years' time, regardless of whoever is controlling national government, we are expecting there will be a review of local government finance. We have to make provision for the fact that it's likely that rural areas like ours or areas like ours where we have high growth will see some of our income taken away and given to other areas in the country that are less fortunate than ours. I think it's called leveling up. Having made that allowance, you'll see that come at the end of the five-year period, we are probably at the moment looking at a deficit of around £5 million. The improvement over what we were forecasting at the beginning of this financial year when we were looking at something over £6 million. We've gone back a little bit because we've seen an increase in income from our commercial properties and we are certainly meeting that target of having a quarter of our income from commercial investments. That quarter of our income from commercial investments is going to help us, but nevertheless you will see from the table on page 88-89 that we will see our income and we assume we will see our income from retained business rates, which includes business rates and other non-domestic rates, four by getting on for a half. We must make that calculation in order to be prepared. While I'm very pleased that, as you can see, once again the five-year meeting term actually has to show is that we are in a very good financial and sound financial position, nevertheless we are looking at a deficit in five years' time and therefore we must continue to make sure that we find those savings and, as you know, we are in the middle of a transformation programme which is going to deliver us £2 million worth of savings, but we must continue with that effort to ensure that by the end of the five-year period we have a balanced position because, you know, by law we have to balance our books and so, therefore, we, in a much better position, a lot of other councils, as Councillor Mills has already pointed out, but nevertheless we must continue to watch every penny. Thank you. Do you have a second for your proposal, Councillor Bridget-Smith? Do you want to speak now or later? Right. First, Councillor Heather Williams, I think. Thank you, Chair. So, I think on this one, it might not surprise, I don't think we will find agreement between the ruling group and ourselves on this one. When we look at page 89, as has been referred to by the lead member, paragraph 27, we can see about the savings income and the budget pressures. Just by the asterisks it says, further service pressures will exaggerate the funding gap. We also know that year on year on year we are told that identifying savings is harder and harder to achieve. We've had that in every budget paper since I was elected and we've probably had them before that. So, given that situation, I have real concerns that the two million savings that forecast is potentially not achievable. Even though that is included, there is still just shy of a £5.5 million budget gap. There are three ways that that gap can be looked at. We can have savings as we can have increased income. Or when we say savings, you can go further and be cut. Different choices can lead to different financial outcomes. That is a matter of choice for the ruling group and it would be for us if we were in charge of the council. I do feel that having a £5.5 million budget gap, whatever the circumstances that create it, is not something I can support because I do believe there are other options that the council could take and so I will not be supporting the MTFS. Next, I think we have council. I apologise, my vice-chair and I disagreed as to the order of speakers and I think he was probably right, but you kindly agreed to wait your turn. So thank you. That's fine, thank you very much. So you mentioned through you chair, the lead member mentioned in his presentation that investments such as those in the Science Park are supporting the council's finances and I wondered if the lead member could give us some explanation of how those investments are supporting the council's work elsewhere. Before you respond to that, can I just check whether we perhaps take some other speakers first? Yes, thank you. Thank you, chair. I was pleased to read the medium term financial strategy noting the clear governance and strategic thought and commitment to best values woven through the report. On Tuesday this week at Audit Committee, the independent external auditors commented that they have no significant concerns regarding our governance and our ability to deliver best value. Does this give the lead member assurance that we are able to deliver our midterm financial strategy successfully? Again, Councillor Williams, before you respond, I have I think just one other speaker, Councillor Nieto. Thank you, chair. Just on page 91 on business rates, it says that to support property development and boost the economy in the local area, just that line. So I just wanted to understand, to have a bit more clarity if the intention is to reinvest and support businesses or businesses benefiting from this scheme, what is the impact? Councillor John Williams, do you want to answer some of those questions and respond to those points? Thank you, chair. First of all, I'll take the minute order that they were asked. On the commercial investment situation, back in 2018 when we took control of the council, this council basically had only one commercial investment, which was Urban Street, and all its bear cash was invested in Urban Street. Or in banks that were on interest rates that were below inflation. So apart from Urban Street, there was no investment being done and in fact taxpayers money was falling in value because the interest we were getting on our investments in banks and other commercial institutions was keeping up with inflation. Now having all your eggs in one basket was a very risky situation and one of the things we first started to do was to look at how we spread that risk. We realised that even back then, five years ago, that the science industry in the Greater Cambridge area was on the up and it was pretty obvious that that's where the future lay. First thing we did was invest in a property in the Cambridge Science Park which incidentally is in South Cams. It is not in the city and some people assume that it is in the city but it is actually in our district. As a result of taking out action and as a result of buying two further properties in Cambridge Science Park and repurpose Urban Street so that Urban Street now delivers part of our housing policy and is part of our housing strategy, we have increased our income from commercial activities from just over a million pounds back in 2018 to nearly seven million pounds this financial year and we made a policy commitment a few years back now that at least 25% of our income would come from commercial investments and we are more than achieving that. Our total for the coming year we need around 23 million income and 7 million that is going to come from our commercial investments. So commercial investments have become very important in providing services for our residents but equally it's meant that we have spread the risk and that's something that has been identified by our peer review and also by Ernst Young, our external auditors and that is one of the reasons why we are one of the most sound financial councils in the country. Now if I go on to, that follows nicely on to the question that councillor Ewing put to me was and unfortunately I do apologise, I wasn't able to be at Audit and Governance I was at the Environmental Conference but I understand and I've seen the YouTube recording that Ernst Young confirmed actually that we are in a good financial position they have no worries about the best value notice and it does beg the question why we've got a best value notice because there seem to be no grounds for it and our external auditors have also identified that there is no grounds for financial reasons why we have a better value notice and you can only assume therefore that the notice has been issued for purely political reasons and then finally on the business rate retention scheme this is all to do with I think people don't realise that business rates aren't levied by this council business rates are collected by this council on behalf of the government and the government then gives back to this council and the other councils that we build for a certain percentage of those business rates that at the moment we get back as a council 40% of the business rates we collect for a long time now there has been a proposal that we should get back 100% of those rates but it's never come to anything and it's very unlikely now where we are with the current government and the likelihood of a general election next year that that will ever happen so at the moment the business rate retention scheme allows us to retain 40% of those rates that we collect the county collects 9% and the fire authority keeps 1% so the other 50% is retained by the government and not many businesses realise that their business rates don't come here half of it goes to the government and it's the government that sets that business rate and it's the government that values their businesses on which they charge that business rate we are merely people who collect it so I hope that explains the situation regarding business rates Thank you councillor Williams before I come to the leader who seconded that and may wish to speak to it I'm only calling each speaker once on this if that's all right I was going to come to councillor Dan Lentel Let me just say councillor Williams It may help chair I mean if the councill would like to let me have you writing her question then I will ask the head of finance to respond to her If that's okay I think I actually have Forgive me councillor Lentel, I know you're next I think I actually have a discussion to call you again so perhaps you'd like to respond to that Thank you chair It's just that it didn't answer my question it was basically we retained 40% and I just want to understand what is it that we do with that 40% because on the paragraph 36 it says that we use that money to support property development and boost the economy in the local area so I just want to understand if it's ring fans if it goes back to businesses if we reinvest, what do we do with that money? Okay, councillor Williams I'm going to say that I think you had an answer to the question earlier but I suggest that we take up councillor John Williams his earlier suggestion that you get a further written response to the sort of detail he asked for rather than seeking to go into it now Is that all right councillor Williams? If you want, otherwise I will be happy to respond now Sorry, I didn't understand the question in the first place there Well that confirms that we would be best if you don't mind if we give you a written answer to your further question and make sure you have all the information you need on that councillor Dan Lenton Thank you chair Just to comment on the comment that councillor John Williams made about the special value notice and the special measures we're in Sorry, don't take special measures I draw his attention to pages 20 plus of the best value standards and intervention a statutory guide for best value authorities where they indicate as a potential failure are listed I found out 23, 27 that apply to this council and while I don't think any of them refer to us in terms of our underlying finances the flagship policy of this council is well it's not brilliant is it Thank you Before I ask anyone to respond to that I had meant to point out earlier a response to councillor John Williams we are not discussing the best value notice today for anyone who missed it that was 10 days ago we are discussing the proposal put forward by councillor John Williams earlier so I'm not proposing to allow a response to that if anyone wants to make a written response that is fine but that is not subject to today's motion councillor Bridget Smith did you want to speak in seconding your right so the motion that I to make D on the medium term financial strategy has been put in seconded we've now had the debate so I don't think I'm even going to ask if we can take this by affirmation I think we will therefore just move direct to a vote on this so you will see that the vote is in front of you and as soon as we finish this vote I propose to have a short break before we move on to other items so members if you would remember to press the blue button first and then of course the green button if you wish to support this motion and the red if you wish to oppose it and of course the yellow if you wish to obtain thank you councillor Milne's I suspect you do not think that's everything thank you so I think all the vote you want to vote and the result is out on the screen that motion is passed 23 in favour of 6 against with one abstention I think members this would be a good moment to take a short break can we be back here again for quarter past 3 please thank you welcome back to this meeting of South Cambridge District Council we're now on item 9 I think yes here we are so this is a matter of the appointment of the independent remuneration panel member the papers on this are pages 1 on 5 on and I call again on the lead cabinet member for finance to present this report and move the recommendations councillor John Williams thank you as you know we had one of our independent members of the remuneration panel resign and we had to look for an alternative and I'm very pleased to say that we have found an excellent candidate in Nicky Blannan Nicky lives in Cambridgeshire she's the current head of the accommodation service at the University of Cambridge but she has no connections with this council over the last five years she's been a member of the independent remuneration panel for the following authorities Cambridgeshire authority the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough combined authority Fendland district council and Huntington district council so I think she's an excellent candidate for this post and I expect her skills and experience to be an asset to the panel so I hope that you will agree to her appointment thank you thank you councillor Williams do you have a seconder for that proposal councillor Brown Mills now does anyone wish to speak on this item I think councillor Braddon was raising hand offering to second so anyone wish to speak on this item can we take this by affirmation agreed anyone against anyone wish to abstain now I think we can take that by affirmation and that proposal is agreed we then move on to the reports from associated organisations item 10 report from the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough combined authority the council is invited to note the updates from the CPCA do our representatives on the CPCA have any comments they wish to make I will come to councillor Braddon after that if I may do our representatives have any comments to make councillor Braddon if you want to speak on this thank you chair there have been a number of incendiary comments in the media following the combined authority board meeting yesterday specifically around the code of conduct decision notice and I wondered if the leader could clarify the situation with that please leader thank you very much so I will repeat what I said in the board meeting yesterday so I'm completely content that an extremely robust process was undertaken by a subcommittee of the combined authorities audit and corporate governance committee which is a committee that is created by statute that subcommittee was a cross party committee and they reached a unanimous decision regarding the sanctions which they thought it was appropriate to levy on the mayor and they were unanimous in their agreement that there was full publication of the report was not in the public interest so if the monitoring officer took extensive expert legal advice to confirm that everything was legally compliant and that the decision not to publish everything was in the public interest it's really unfortunate that there's been something of a witch hunt here it's not what our residents want to see our residents want to see all levels of local government working hard in their best interest delivering transport and housing and all the other things that we're meant to be doing that really matter to people people who aren't sighted on what the findings of the committee were they were absolutely clear that there was never any accusation of any physical or sexual impropriety at all the mayor was found to have brought the combined authority into disrepute he had brought the mayor's office into disrepute and the main thing that he was accused of was showing a lack of leadership these things all happened two years ago it's a dramatically different organisation now from how it was it's a really dramatically different organisation from how it was when I first joined it five or six years ago when it was a thoroughly unpleasant place for many members to be so lots of changes have been implemented since then there's code of conduct training in December for all members HR policy has been updated whistleblowing policy has been updated those are all available on the website and there's been no complaints submitted since July 22 so it's been unpleasant the mayor failed in some respects he has the sanctions that were imposed on him was that he should apologise to the people involved that has all happened and happened in a right and proper way and I think it's really important now that the combined authority draws a line up under this and gets on doing the job that the majority of the members of the board and certainly the majority of our residents want us to get on doing thank you for your question thank you members I think it was very helpful to have a report on that item given the amount of recent coverage on it I'm keen that we focus our debate today on the measures of the combined authority and don't stray too much into HR matters council centre I think you had a comment on this yeah thank you chair a risk of being exceedingly picky can I point out the report from the environment and sustainable communities committee on page 133 paragraph 1 the name of the substitute is just given as councillor doctor which could be many people I think it would be helpful if a second pair of eyes could review these reports before they're published to hopefully eliminate these glaring errors thank you chair I'm not going to open a book on who councillor doctor might be around here councillor Bridget Smith thank you we'll feed that back to the combined authority we'll clarify that later councillor Lentell thank you chair I am disappointed that the representatives of this council are treating this safeguarding incident that the combined authority is a minor issue I think people have a right to feel safe in the workplace I think officers have a right to feel safe in the workplace and when they're being issued with personal attack alarms and junior members of staff are being told I'm sorry that's hearsay that is hearsay sorry point of information if that may be that will come at the end of the speech please councillor Lentell it may well be hearsay here it is said you know it has been published in the newspapers it is a matter of public record and this would be an appropriate this is why a report that has cost the residents of Cambridgeshire a million pounds cannot simply be swept under the rug but I do have a particular question which is obviously this council has officers and staff who may have to interact with other organisations in our landscape when a safeguarding breach occurs as it has clearly occurred what responsibilities does this council have to ensure that people who work for this council are kept safe what responsibility does this council have to inform staff when there are potential safeguarding issues what training is available to those of us who are members of the council to know that we understand our role in safeguarding again this is about I think it's hugely disappointing to say that a environment in which staff are made to feel physically unsafe to the point where they have to have home security increased is a minor issue it is not thank you councillor Lentell leader you want to respond to that and perhaps deal with your point of information at the same time so I'm really disappointed councillor Lentell you are repeating hearsay in the newspapers sorry I'm not repeating anything I beg your pardon through you chair I am disappointed councillor Lentell in that he is perpetuating hearsay in the newspapers and quite what he wishes to achieve I do not know point of information unless the leader wishes to give way we'll come at the end of the thank you so if through you chair councillor Lentell would like to watch the recording of the meeting yesterday where the issue of the code of conduct complaint was debated for two whole hours you will see that this was treated as far from a minor issue was treated as a very very significant issue and I'm not going to comment on gossip and hearsay I'm afraid but it was made very very clear by the monitoring officer at the meeting that there was no there was no accusation or implication other than gossip in the press of physical or sexual impropriety so you know the mayor's failings were failings of leadership right and by failing in leadership he brought on to his own his own office now I'm not going to I will not I will not give any creams by repeating some of the things that councillor Lentell has chosen to say but I think it's disappointing and I think it's what I say about the residents of South Cambridge are certainly wanting the combined authority to get on and do the job particularly in relation to buses is probably perfectly correct councillor Lentell you had a point of information can you keep it very brief into the point of the point of information is that the information that is in the public domain has come from leaders of other councils who not only sit on the board but who also sat on the committee they have said that the mayor should resign why not because he's accused of not as far as we know he has not done anything personally but he has allowed a situation where staff are made to feel unsafe that's what's happened it's a major breakdown and if that had happened here I think we'd be taking it a lot more seriously and my questions are and I would like them to be properly answered what are the responsibilities that this council has where employees of this council may be put in a room with somebody who is you know making them feel unsafe councillor Lentell we are on a point of information at the moment and you need to show that you're aware that south camps district council has incorrect information do you have any evidence that south camps district council has incorrect information as presented by the leader on this point I'm happy to read an email from another board member that I've seen which gives a very different perspective on this it's your position we need to hear here my position is people have a right to feel safe at work people have a right not to be bullied out of councils as Philippa Hart was and this is not a minor thing and it shouldn't be treated as such thank you right I'm not sure that was a point of information but I will ask the leader if she wants to respond any further or chooses not to do so before we move on to other speakers so rather than relying on the media for factual information through your chair I would recommend that Councillor Lentol and anybody else looks at the reports that were within the combined authority papers for the facts for the facts rather than relying on the press which might well have been fed information by individuals with who are politically motivated rather than motivated by the need to perpetuate the truth on his other questions about safeguarding there are absolutely no relation to the item on our agenda I'm sure that officers can supply them with the details of this council's responsibility on safeguarding but as I see it it doesn't relate to the agenda item yes the leader is quite right to remind me I should bring this back to the agenda item and I'm sure Councillor Paul Bear Park who I have next on my list intends to do that I will chair the leader mentioned the local transport and connectivity plan at the beginning of the meeting I would like to ask the leader if she welcomes the approval of the local transport and connectivity plan leader thank you I think everybody in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough welcomes we finally got this over the line it was it should have been got over the line in September but the then leader of Peterborough council decided to vote against it and you might be aware that either the as the two transport bodies the Cambridge county council or Peterborough county unitary council have veto over it so it was deeply disappointing and a complete surprise to everybody in the room when he decided to to vote against it however he is now a thing of the past as far as the combined authority is concerned of him in fact I think he's still on Scrooche a no view and unfortunately his successor was absolutely delighted to welcome through the the plan finally which also meant that there was going to be a significant investment in an outline business case for a new bus depot within Peterborough which would allow for an increase in electric buses in Peterborough which is good news for Peterborough but actually this is very good news for all of us and it means we can we can pursue the work on the buses and try and reverse the reverse the decline in buses that we are seeing here as is everywhere else in the country Thank you for your question Councillor Heather Williams Thank you chair and through yourself to the leader I I've heard what's been said in relation to the other questions to the mayor's conduct and ultimately myself my group we're not on anything at the combined authority so we need this time to obviously ask questions things have gone on the leader has expressed we said about the mayor but I am a little confused as to whether it's the mayor or the mayor's office and I say that because we've had it referred to the mayor but not the office there are other individuals that if we are to believe what has been said were involved in some incidents so I'd like to know whether the board meeting reflected on those other individuals the other thing that would be good to know as it is taxpayers money how much and if the leader could give us a breakdown how much has been spent on the investigation and on any security equipment or the like that's been provided to people in relation to that and any other on-costs that have been associated with this I think as it's taxpayers money and we are a member of that authority we should see that information and I think my last question chair will be does the leader agree that people if they do feel unsafe and it is subjective to the individual that they should be able to speak out and other people should be able to defend them whether in public, whether in the press or whether in the chambers leader I don't know whether you are able in relation to the cost to separate out those items that mean maybe something no good I'm glad to hear that perhaps you'd like to respond to those questions then so I can certainly respond so the investigation by the sub-committee of the Water and Corporate Governance Committee at the combined authority was solely to do with the mayor there was there was no yes it was solely to do with the mayor so all I know about all I am privy to is stuff to do with the mayor whether there was anyone else involved I cannot I cannot comment I cannot comment I can't say anything more about that on the cost of it that amount of my fingertips but I'm really happy to ask for it from the combined authority I'll also add to that because I have been asked elsewhere about what the the cost has been during both this mayor's and the previous mayor's incumbency in payoffs to staff who have left the organisation so I'm happy to find that information as well I think it might be quite an interesting comparison and do I agree with you that people feel unsafe at work they must have every opportunity to speak out and to be supported by other people yes of course thank you councillor dr Richard Williams thank you very much it's a question for the leader the meeting she was at yesterday as we've already heard approved the local transport and connectivity plan the leader is quoted in the press this morning having said that road charging is coming can I ask the leader is it her personal view that there should be road charging in Cambridgeshire before the leader applies to that I'm not sure this is directly related to this item and I think we will have an opportunity to discuss it later or may have so councillor Williams are you happy that we come back to this later under that item not really chair because it's related to the approval of the transport connectivity plan and the leader's comments on that and we have already discussed the transport and connectivity plan I think the leader mentioned it herself so to my mind it's legitimate to ask a question on that leader I think we can take it under that item if you're happy to respond yes so depending on which press you read I have been misquoted in one and accurately quoted in the other so there was a debate which councillor Bowden said that it was vital that the LTCP was future proofed and that it couldn't be a document that didn't meet the needs for some years to come so I supported what he said and in that I said that that is one of the reasons why road charging still needed to be included in the LTCP as an option because there are various documents I've put away this one there's various documents quite clearly showing that this government and more than likely any future government of a different persuasion absolutely you could just tell us what the document is you're waiting for it, can't all read the fine print from here so this is from the House of Commons Library it's called Local Road Charges it's dated 14th March 2018 by Louise Butcher so that's from the current government so the point I made was that when I said that road charging was coming in some shape or form irrespective of what party was in charge of the country that we need to be able to accommodate that and my personal view about Cambridge I haven't made a personal view about Cambridge right Members, I think we've gone into that insufficient detail we have no need for a vote on that item we're merely noting the update Greater Cambridge Partnership Item 11 Council has invited to note the updates from the GCP the Greater Cambridge Partnership Do our representatives on GCP have any comments they wish to make? No that the report is before us happy time to take any questions thank you Chair Any questions for our representatives on the GCP Councillor Heather Williams Thank you Chair through yourself we're just going to refer to page 151 8C in relation to Cambridge South East Transport scheme as we know there's a big budget issue in that and it was agreed to pause to look for more funds however it was mentioned by a non-voting board member about that having a time limit and sort of suggesting that it should be 6 months and then look to other options just wondering that's something that this council will be supporting in its representation or not I think you may know at the meeting I supported that suggestion that it should be reviewed I don't know whether everyone could hear Councillor Milne's then on my train perhaps you'd like to have another try Very unusually I'll try from the dire from So at the meeting I think it was 28th September I supported the suggestion that we have a 6 month review I don't think you'd quite finish your original question Councillor Heather Williams you'd like to complete your question Thank you I appreciate the eagerness of the response that was given I'll say that it was review but it wasn't clear as to whether at that point if the funding's hand been found that alternative options should be made and whether the council was preparing for alternative routes prices and things obviously there is quite a lot on offer in that area I appreciate that was a response in the meeting obviously there's time and a group and the leader perhaps gives way to the view Councillor Milne So the answer to your question is that the whole process will be reviewed so for example there has been a bid effectively to the Government and Michael Gove's Visionary 2040 scheme and the Cambridge delivery group headed by President Peter Freeman that they offer as the funding that is in shortfall why we didn't proceed with it so all options are still available to us but that is at the moment the preferred option if we can find the finance Thank you any further questions to the representative on the GCP I noticed the reference to Visionary 2040 that's a new name for it I think members we're ready to move on to the next item and we don't need a vote on that one so we can just note that Update on the Oxford Cambridge pan regional partnership item 12 I invite the leader of the council to provide an oral update Thank you very much So the OCPRP held a conference in Milton Keynes last Friday which had between 200 and 300 delegates there it was really really good there's lots of information I'm sure on the website so this was all sorts of people actually but it was chaired for the first time by Dipesh Shah who is now the very eminent chair of the board and there was all sorts of presentations I sat on one about where the partnerships got to as of now and obviously with my role on the leading on the environment and the environmental projects we're hoping to move forward I also sat on one with the universities group talking about skills and there was a really fabulous presentation from young young people about the whole of the sort of green skills agenda so it was very dynamic very positive I'm sure there will be a rolling program of these conferences anybody's welcome at it there was lots to learn lots of really useful networking and it's interesting to see some other councils coming back on board so I had long chat to one of the Northamptonshire leaders there so people who weren't in the room now that they're seeing this as something potentially very positive particularly regarding the environment are now wanting to be part of it Right, any questions to the leader on that presentation Councillor Heather Williams Thank you chair just some reassurance that we will get I don't have the oral update today but we will get a substantive written report at some point from the leader for us to obviously be able to scrutinise so this was conference so I'm just reporting on a conference the board papers are now all available on the website of the OCPRP and we've only had two board meetings at the moment so we're just in the process of signing off governance and so on but again it's all on the website so when there's any additionality that we can provide then we will do that Perhaps we could add the papers of the recent board meeting and maybe a future one to the next papers of the next council in February if that would be possible So what we have on so far is as students chair through you is our kind of decision notices because I've referred to Liz actually and what's best Thank you executive Thank you chair There's been a board meeting since the last council meeting there hadn't been a board meeting when these papers were published so there will be a report coming to the next council Right, okay I see no other questions I think we can move on to the next business we may have to note that or a report by the leader Membership of committees and outside bodies item 13 I'm not aware of any changes to the membership of committees or outside bodies No So we move to questions from councillors item 14 I remind members that a period of 30 minutes is available for questions This includes those questions when it's been provided which are set out on the agenda and if there is time still remaining after those we will deal with any questions which have been notified to the Democratic Services Manager before the start of this meeting so I will invite councillors to ask their questions in the following order Firstly, Council Daniel Lentell I was on the paper chair Thank you Thank you chair and through you I note that Councillor Lentell is on his usual series of questions that are somewhat leading a scarce effect on conjecture but no less he asks about the removal of mature trees in relation to the C2C proposed bus routes in Coton Orchard As I said at the climate conference that we referenced earlier there's a tension between infrastructure and natural habitat and this is a prime example of such there's also a policy of 10% by the first in net gain and in relation to this area the GCP is committed to planting 1500 1500 new trees along the route significantly more than it will remove heteros will also be maintained largely as the GCP is committed to that 10% as a minimum biodiversity net gain and with an ambition of reaching the stretch target of 20% the majority of trees removed to facilitate the corridor public transport including cycling and walking are relatively young on dwarf route stop and including only between 2 and 6 11 older trees the total area of remaining activity could measure 9 hectares and of this one and a half hectares will be lost to the scheme this would leave roughly 80% of the remaining activity should untouch and unaffected by the development so I hope that brings into context the scope and scale of the scheme thank you Yes, councillor did you have a supplementary question chair will do you respect we've not got to my question yet councillor will tell did you have a supplementary question I'm sure councillor Williams would have a much better supplementary question I think the reason there is so much disquietude of all in the county about the impact on curtain water first of all biodiversity net gain we've had similar promises in the past we haven't been watered and trees have died and we haven't actually seen the net gain happen but the real issue here is that the promised biodiversity impact assessment for the on-road alternative was never delivered even though it was promised and that promise the breaking of that promise it's hard to trust people who break their promises thank you chair no question I think we've had the supplementary but I don't think that was a question so we'll move on to the next I think question B so we do now councillor councillor Williams, sorry about being a bit ahead of myself there sorry, apologies you both have been a little ahead of myself there councillor Heather Williams would you like to put your question thank you chair councillor Bridget Smith I think you're going to answer this one so those of us who've worked in academic research which I think there's quite a few in this chamber actually will be aware that to be credible independent reports need to be both independent and of course factually correct serious academic institutes such as Cambridge University where I worked in research double check the contents of their reports and make sure that details are correct I understood the situation correctly sadly not all organisations some elements of the press in particular aren't so diligent and this leads to basic errors an example of which is when it was wrongly reported that our own contact centre hours had been reduced when in fact they had increased as part of our four day week trial so failure to undertake these basic checks actually leads to sloppy reporting mistakes and a loss of all credibility so it's an actually potential harm to the institutions and potentially distressed to individuals as well so it's about right and proper procedure in order to produce robust factually correct reports councillor The Woodins you have a supplementary yes chair having listened so it seems like the leader is happy with that process as well I'm going to gauge from the response obviously there was an incident from this council and one of the reasons that was given for needing to do that was because the person putting the report together was not a native English speaker and I've read the report and there's probably no more grammatical errors than I would make as a native English speaker so is the leader happy for that to be used as a reason for requesting changes I'm not leader so this was about clarity of information whatever the reason there was in the person drafting it for there being a clearer way of articulating stuff is neither here nor there but it's about clarity now look I've talked to one of the members of this organisation whose contribution was removed and what they've told me is that it was removed because it was possible to identify a person through what had been said and that member is absolutely satisfied that that was a legitimate and proper reason for removing a piece of text so this is about making things clear and factually correct and I'm 100% comfortable with that next we move on to a question from councillor Graham Cohn thank you chair it's just as on the order paper Peter do you wish to answer that or do you remember your cabinet to answer thanks chair yes if you don't mind I will answer on behalf of cabinet being responsible for economic development and infrastructure try and answer councillor Cohn's question so first thing to say on this to begin with which is obviously this process started before the administration took control I think it was actually my county council predecessor Peter Topping that first initiated the projects in the relocation of the plan second thing to say is the response that the council has provided in the local and the response to questions in the local impact report is a very technical process but we fully understand the residents in the area this is a significant project we fully understand their concerns so the purpose of the report and the response to questions is to advise the examining authority responsible for assessing the development of the impact of the proposals in order to do this on behalf of the council and the shared planning service we did engage widely across the council with the relevant experts and worked together with the county council and the city council to draw together the findings and this was finally presented in a report which Cabinet considered and approved and felt that the answers to the questions over 100 pages I think it was and very detailed questions that that was appropriate so the assessment is necessarily technical as I mentioned it requires consideration of the environmental impact assessment associated technical reports it's a the report gives commentary on the planning policy context et cetera so finally it will be down for the examining authority not the council itself in terms of the process to consider whether having regard to the local impact report the representations made by others balances the technical questions and the planning considerations and ultimately has to be approved after a state so I'm sorry if he feels that the cabinet response was not adequate but it was a very very thorough process thank you councillor Cymru do you have a supplementary? Yeah I'll try and be brief so through you chair does the leader or the cabinet member answering the question believe that sort of my residents foods were fairly considered within the papers given that within those papers on page 142 of the document the district council well this is a quote from those documents the district council gives in principle support to the dco application the proposed development subject to the resolution of a number of matters thanks don't have a particular page in front of me I think when you take the response in the round of all the questions and the fact that there are still outstanding questions to be answered then I think it is a fair submission thank you chair thank you we then move on to a question from councillor Dr Richard Williams thank you very much chair my question is that on the agenda let me just emphasise that is a question to the leader the leader is however entitled to ask someone else to answer it on behalf of councillor Peter Macdonald thank you keeping me busy today so in response to councillor Richard Williams it will be aware the following publication of the preferred route by East West Rail we as a council have been seeking further details from them to understand the implications of the proposed revisions it's really important to understand that as yet we have not had that detail despite asking him many times and so on that basis the council isn't able to assess the impact of those changes at the moment and we have expressed to the minister and earlier correspondents very real concerns from the communities were extremely aware of that so as councillor Williams will be aware the East West Rail project seeking to connect Cambridge to the skill workforce space the biomedical campus, Cambridge South Station and the city centre the new station at Camborn on our doorstep and its enhanced connectivity does have the potential to support future ambitions for the residents of Camborn and our joint local plan has already highlighted potential for further growth we now have to consider the possible impact of Cambridge 2040 Mr Goh's project and so we're looking forward to hearing more about that and so in summary and to try and answer his question directly we remain supportive overall of East West Rail but are still awaiting further details from the government and the project before we can comment in detail thanks thank you very much chair thank you to councillor McDonald for that answer I'm sure councillor McDonald has really joined with me in calling for a publication of the business case as soon as possible a proper business case which we need to see but specifically could I ask councillor McDonald and the administration generally would they particularly offer support to the residents of Newton in my ward and indeed Haarston actually that's outside my ward because the East West Rail proposal has put a huge concrete grain separated junction on the outskirts of Haarston in absolutely the worst place it could possibly be it severs the main road from Newton to Haarston it severs the main road to the school and would force people to go on a diversion via the A10 so would the administration at least offer support to residents of Newton and as I'm sure Haarston as well in seeking that particular aspect of this proposal if it must go ahead to be substantially changed and made more acceptable and cause less disruption to residents Could I pick up on on thank you in deference to leader and cabinet member Newton being on my county council patch is a situation that's very familiar to me and one that I've taken up directly with Beth West who's the MD of the East West Rail Company and this connectivity and potential loss of connectivity is one of the several issues that we are concentrating on so that the impact of such a development would have been minimised as far as possible now we have no answers before us about how they will try and mitigate that loss of connectivity so it's a topic that's still very much prevailing and one we will keep close attention to and as much as visual immunity with the height of the I can't remember what the expression is great separation thank you connectivity is a key issue for us Councillor Peter Faddon wants to add something to that as well if you don't mind chair as both councillor Milms and myself both double-haters and I'm the councillor for Councillor Williams patch in Wittlesford and certainly that connectivity issue is very much at the top of the agenda for me thank you thank you we now move on to three questions from councillors who've had to leave us councillor Lina Nieto, councillor Mark Howell and councillor Tom Bygott I think the procedure is that we give them the opportunity of either putting this on the agenda for the next meeting which is not until February or giving them a written answer and I think the proposal is to give them a written answer in these cases councillor for the Williams is that your understanding yes chair that's my understanding we then how much time have we got left of time for questions we have no right as members will be aware it is possible to ask questions without the seven days notice but only if they're presented to democratic services or monitoring officer before the meeting and no other questions have been presented so before we move on to the next item of business I'm proposing to take another short break but this time if we could be back by quarter past four that would be good thank you very much thank you welcome back to this meeting of South Cambridge district council we now come to item 15a item 15 and we have a motion standing in the name of councillor Heather Williams councillor Williams would you like to move your motion please thank you chair the purpose of my motion has already been reflected in some of what's been said earlier in relation to transport plans for the wider area we heard a version of what was said appreciate the leader said there were different things reported in the press but the sentiment still seems to be the same that there is a view that road charging options should be kept on the table this is something that I'm very concerned about if this council is a member of numerous outside bodies such as the GCP and the combined authority I believe residents have been very clear that they don't want to see road charging in Cambridge in particular and I think that that would be replicated throughout the county so in bringing my motion I hope very much that people will take into consideration the debates we've already had on congestion charging in Cambridge of which we have had many in this chamber and really think about the impact that that would have on our residents and what this motion seeks to do is to set a policy of this council which is what all motions should be doing that the council will not support road charging options in Cambridge here being included in the plans appreciate there's a bit of a situation because this council is representative already yesterday I believe supported options but I'm of the hope that it's not too late to change course so please do I won't go on much on because we've debated this a lot in this council chamber but please do consider voting for this motion I think it's what residents want to see I think they want to see clear opposition to road charging bit of that congestion charging or any other form and we'll see how the vote goes chair but please do consider the words that are in the agenda it's no to road charging full stop in Cambridge here of any form Thank you councillor Wynnins do you have a seconder for your motion? I do chair councillor Dan Lentell thank you councillor Wynnins do you wish to reserve your right to speak or to speak now? I'll speak after everyone else thank you chair Who wishes to respond to this? councillor Brann Wynnins Thank you chair I hope everybody can hear me I sought the advice as the chair had already done about the admissibility of this motion because clearly South Wales District Council has no provenance, has no remit of highways matters central government however clearly mandate such things so I would reference two documents one the previously cited briefing paper on local road chargers I would reference the Commons Transport Committee that in 2022 said there was no alternative sorry this is a conservative government I'm talking about may I just remind the council so this is the Conservatives telling us that road charging is inevitable so that's completely in contrast with this motion today Hugh Merriman who is now Transport Minister has on his website a requirement for filling the 35 billion pounds black hole that is the reduction likely reduction in vehicle excise duty and fuel tax here the statutory authority for highways is the county council and this idea has already been discussed in fact just very recently on October 17 where the councillor Steve council motion was denied which sought to do the same as this proposal to take congestion charging road charging, road pricing whatever cinnamon we want to use for it because of the inevitability I was minded chair to think about King Canute who often is cited incorrectly as wanting to disprove or proof his powers he wanted to show that he was no point he had no more power than any other mortal to face the inevitability of the tide and the inevitability of a long long day of road charging is just the same prospect that we have before us today and it's not just Hugh Merriman the transport minister your friends in Tufton Street 55 Tufton Street which is a place you often cite your figures from sorry councillor Milne I'm not aware that I had any friends in Tufton Street sorry chair I forget myself Milne's if you would just wind up your comments as well the point is whether it's 25 billion that's quoted from alliance of British drivers in Tufton Street or there's 35 billion that Hugh Merriman quotes the question remains where is that deficit going to be filled and the idea that we can prescribe we can deny the possibility of road charging is pretty much a denial to nowhere councillor Milne next I think we have councillor Stephen Drew thank you chair I don't think this motion is about road charging I think it's an attempt by desperate Conservative party to find something they can say which the public won't reject them for therefore most of the comments I wish to make relates to the politicking office because I don't believe for one second that it's about road charging what appeal became the Conservative Prime Minister and issued the Tamworth manifesto he changed the Conservative party and he said we would reform to survive he rejected the old Tory ideas of the Duke of Wellington what's really sad is that the modern Conservative party has represented by this motion are back to the Duke of Wellington they're back to the pre-reformat days they just reject for the sake of it the motion has been thought out rejecting any form of road charging forever doesn't show concern for residents and the economic success of our county it shows a closed mind that refuses to evaluate the effectiveness of the range of possible solutions that experts in the field may choose to promote surely our Conservative colleagues wish to be seen as expert-driven politics surely they wish to be open minded that is not what they are doing this is exactly like their Prime Minister Mr Soon acts immediate opposition to the introduction of 20 mile-nose speed limits in Wales he immediately comes out and rejects it is that another thing that the South Cambridgeshire Conservative group wish to know that they reject because I'd like to see them share that with residents of South Cambridgeshire we know what the views of South Cambridgeshire residents are on 21 mile-nose limits this is all part of the same policy the knee jerk is deliberately misleading opposition to 15 minute cities that Tories and their client journalists have been putting forward where they simply tell lies about it it's all part of the same thing it's rejection there's nothing moving forward we've seen current surfers in Cambridgeshire immediately reject the attempts of the combined authority to improve bus services because their immediate response is we can't pay for it we can't possibly pay for it this idea on road charging is exactly the same I was really disappointed recently a briefing from county officers to hear that the introduction of civil parking enforcement may be weakened within South Cambridgeshire on the government are directing councils not to be too tough on motorists they mustn't want to war on motorists what about pedestrians what about disabled people and old people what about people who want to go to shops maybe if the Conservative Party spent a bit more time worrying about residents and a bit more time worrying about the people they're supposed to represent and less time worrying about having knee jerk rejections of things and not being willing to be open minded we'd be better off in this motion it doesn't mean that I think road park charging is a good idea it simply means that it's not about road pricing it's about a desperate Conservative Party who know how unpopular they are and are looking for one thing where the public won't reject them for everything they say next I think we have councillor Peter Sanford thank you chair and through you I'd like to just follow upon councillor Milne's earlier comments he did indeed cite Hugh Merriman as the chair of the cross party transport select committee in the House of Commons as seeing no viable alternative to road pricing there's another comment Mr Merriman said he believes the public would support a scheme despite previous opposition and this is the result of a committee of MPs from all parties who have looked across the spectrum for many many months and reported back in detail if Mr Merriman says the public would support such a scheme who am I to argue with him the Chancellor took almost a year to respond Chancellor Hunt responded in 2023 the government does not currently have plans to consider road pricing I think that's a subtle hint that whatever government is in office after the next general election road pricing is coming across the country I think such a broad brush motion as councillor Williams has proposed would lead us all sorts of difficulties and we should be prepared to collaborate constructively with whichever government is offering us road pricing so I'll be voting against this motion for that reason thank you chair Next I call councillor Graham Cohen Thank you chair so again I'll be brief but essentially I'll be supporting this motion because I believe our residents have spoke loud and clearly on congestion charge and it really is about time that we put this issue to bed and not spend any more money going over proposals that are clearly unpalatable for our residents in this area we do have decision making powers I know it's a county issue but we do make up part of the GCP and we are part of the combined authority which have influence over travel so I don't think we can distance ourselves completely from these issues and I think this motion is very reasonable so that our residents know it has been completely taken off the table Thank you Before I come back to I think we have one more speaker councillor Martin Cohn Thank you very much indeed I think councillor Cohn's comments Chairman come back to the point that basically this motion is about the congestion charge and trying to bring it back forward but the actual motion is not about congestion charge the political purpose behind it is to bring it back to the fall the congestion charge the decision has been decided that's not the problem but this motion proposes that all congestion should not be considered and that's a different motion clearly there may well be cases where different proposals will put forward different solutions in particular related to the congestion charge which they are trying to bring back we have since originally was proposed that we have a much larger Cambridge 2014 proposal by the government which will need a high standard probably a high standard proposal for a local sustainable transport system and we need to if the government is going to propose this it's really incumbent upon the conservative government to propose a solution to that what that will be I don't know but the government somehow has to find the money to provide that and we need that and so I would throw that to the party opposite to the chairman to think about how they might fund that all proposals I think need to be on the table and therefore I think this motion is unsatisfactory answering the problems that we've got in front of us now before I come back to the seconder of the motion and the mover of the motion to sum up I have now two speakers councillor Dr Richard Williams first and then councillor Anna Braden before we come to that though do I have any other speakers who want to speak in this debate no so after those two speakers we will move on to the seconder and to the mover to sum up councillor Dr Richard Williams thank you very much chair I'll be supporting this motion and really the last contribution sums up why I think it's important that we have this motion that we do take a clear stand on this when we started off the last contribution saying that congestion charging was off the table but then the contribution ended by saying all proposals need to be on the table now you can't have both of those positions congestion charging can't be off the table but we have to have all proposals on the table and this is exactly the problem that apparently because half or just over half of the little democrat democrat group opposite apparently decided they were against the congestion charge the congestion charge was blown apart but then we get in the news today again the leader saying that road charging is inevitable and when I asked the leader earlier whether she supported road charging in Cambridge she didn't give me an answer she said she'd never expressed a view on road charging now I think people in South Cambridge are entitled to know what the view of their elected politicians is on this question of whether or not we have road charging we have a very clear view the view opposite seems to be well no but yes but maybe no but maybe yes and who knows everything needs to be on the table and you know we had an interesting contribution from Councillor Drew earlier but you know there is such a thing as politicians actually saying what they believe and you know saying we're against this and then people can vote for you or they can vote against you if you want politicians to sit I'm going to be like an academic expert I don't really have any views but elect me and I'll think about the evidence and you know might say this might say that might say the other people want to know where their politicians stand and it's perfectly reasonable for people to want to know where their politicians stand on important local matters like this so it's not a political game it's politics you know we're supposed to have views but what our views are so I think it's really important that we clarify this point we rule out rogue charging once and for all it doesn't keep coming back we move on we look at other solutions we do need solutions so we move on put this one to bed and one final thing I will say is we've had the House of Commons Library quoted a couple of times as if it's a Government body the House of Commons Library is not the Government the House of Commons Library according to its website and indeed in fact is a research and information service based in the UK Parliament which provides non-political research and information to MPs and peers and MPs staff so it's not the slam dunk you think citing a report by the House of Commons Library which isn't written by a Conservative it's written by the House of Commons employee who provides impartial reports and advice so that's not Government policy and I would have thought most people would have known that and next we have Councillor Adam Bradman Thank you very much Chair so to answer Councillor Williams who wanted a clear view my clear view is that I completely oppose this motion for the following reasons and I would I have spoken this explanation to people on the doorsteps in innumerous places and people have understood where I'm coming from and have in many cases changed their view so the point is that there's a principle on this that I believe that we shouldn't make decisions which tie the hands of future decision makers and we shouldn't prevent something which is a reasonable option from being considered in future so I oppose this view and I will not be voting for it Thank you Before we come to the seconder and the mover of the motion one last chance to see if there are any other members present who want to take part in the debate Yes point of information Councillor Bradman Yes you rather have ridden me along and I would like to point out that there are currently no proposals on this table from the GCP or the CPCA or any other Peterborough and Cambridge bodies for the congestion charge the U-Lens charge or any other form of road charge and the House of Commons Transport Committee is a body of Parliament and was dominated by I think six members of the Conservative party including Mr Merriman Thank you I think Councillor Dr Motton-Cann has spoken already You have a It's briefly a point of information It's referred to the point that I commented that all options on the table I would refer to the point that as I noted this motion is about road charging in general and not just about the it wasn't to do with the congestion charge I was saying that you don't want to in terms of the fact in general the introduction of road charging not about the specific thing and I made clear that the decision has been made on that Thank you Dr. Cahn that's a clarification point of information Next I move to Councillor Dan Lentill you are the secondary of this motion Do you want to speak now? Yes if everyone else has had their say a week ago we had Councillor Bygott quoting the American Civil War Admiral Farragut in relation to the four-day week trial Straight ahead and don't mind the torpedoes I'm going to quote a more famous Admiral, Admiral Ackbar from Star Trek Star Wars even There'll be emails It's a trap You're quite right The Conservatives, I'm not a Conservative Never been a member of the Conservative Party Never voted Conservative in a national election I'm from the Labour Party originally and we don't like poll taxes We don't like flat rate taxes that fall on the low and no paid hardest We don't like regressive taxes I thought that was something that Liberal Democrats didn't like Apparently not If you'd have told me 20 years ago that I was studying politics at Hills Road If you'd have told me that South Cambridgeshire was going to be yellow I would have not believed you, I wouldn't have thought that was possible because we live in a very blue part of the world If you'd have told me that two years ago that I would be walking through the streets of Cambridge I can't quite bring myself to say marching walking through the streets of Cambridge with hundreds and thousands of fellow residents opposing this I would say No, you'll find me in the pub Maybe the Disraelia, the Beckinsfield or the Earl of Derby who are later Prime Ministers than Stephen Drew seems to be Councillor Drew seems to be aware of I'm still on the stage with the GMB union and the Conservative Party I don't think that's ever been done before I've addressed the Communist Party on this issue and the Reform Party The absolute antithesis an opposition to this form of taxation could not be clearer and if we're going back in time let's go back to 1381 and the first poll tax that was imposed and led to massive civil unrest and disobedience or we could go back to the 1980s when Mrs Margaret Thatcher tried to do something similar these taxes are fundamentally un-English it's not what we do we do not believe that Dukes and Duffsmann should pay the same as each other it is a poll tax because it is a tax that everybody who relies on private transport and we do live in quite a rural part of the world where the buses aren't reliable and by the way I'm never going to be reliable right we live in a part of the world where people rely on private transport particularly to access their healthcare certainly chair this opportunity this once in a generation opportunity for somebody other than the blue team to be running affairs here in South Cambridgeshire this congestion charge is going to define what was proposed and it's such a shame and it's such a wasted opportunity and it is not I promise you it is not simply conservative reactionaryness there we go Councillor Lentell and then I come to the mover of the motion Councillor Heather Williams Thank you chair I'll try to sum up in what I see is that the key points have been made one of which has been made about authority and I do believe that given we are members of the GCP and the combined authority that we do have a say and influence also we went through a period in this council of probably being the best known letter writers for district councils in the country because we had motion after motion of writing a letter to have an issue with X or an issue with Y some of which we supported some of which we didn't they all went outside the scope of the council and actually sometimes things were potentially negative towards the government at the time but we locally supported them because it was the right thing to do in our view so there is history to the council demonstrating its viewpoint on things that aren't just direct responsibilities of the council I think the debate is disappointing though I would credit Councillor Brighton for at least discussing the actual motion and the merits and standing up for having potential options for road charging because the majority of it has been about the party and party politics and the electioneering of the bus in this chamber elected through politics but it doesn't mean that we don't say what we think and we don't represent people in the way that we think is right I unashamably will do what I think is right and I don't think there's anything wrong in that and I would have no way do I always agree with what's been done at the council and most of you are probably tired of hearing me posing it but I've said before it is your right your democratic right to do what you think is right and it's mine to say when I don't think it is but I don't say that people are lying or that they have just not caring about residents or this, that and the other it's disrespectful to each other across the chamber but also it's disrespectful to our residents and the whole point of why we're here so irrespective of who's in government yes currently it's the same party as us but I would be saying the same thing that I don't think this is the right thing for our residents and I stand by that now I will stand by it whatever government is in charge and whatever party is in charge of this council because it's what I think is right I'm not ashamed to do that I won't be ashamed for doing that and I do think it is sad chair that where debate has got in this council chamber these days Thank you Councillor Williams we now move straight to the vote on this motion I'm not going to insult anyone's intelligence probably suggesting that we do so via affirmation so if you would like to participate in an electronic vote usual rules apply press the blue button first and then to remind you if you want to support the motion as put by Councillor Heather Williams you press the green if you want to oppose it you press the red the vote is now open right that concludes the vote that motion is defeated by 20 votes to 6 no abstentions on this occasion so we now move on to our final item of business today which is chair's engagements so I think members will be aware that events I have attended on behalf of this council include the justice service for the High Sheriff of Cambridge at Peterborough Cathedral referred to here on 10 October the BBSRC CROP diversity event at Nyab at Histon this was attended by the Princess Royal who not only opened it but also stayed on to close it having spent just over an hour and 20 minutes speaking to all the scientists present at the conference individually on 28 October I attended the Springstead Village opening launch in Cherryhinton that is actually just within the boundary of the city and the Deputy Mayor actually opened it on that occasion and of course on the 10 November I attended the very privileged to attend the Veterans Day ceremony at Madding the American Cemetery on this occasion I'm also going to mention some future engagements this doesn't say chair's past engagements so I think I'm allowed to do that like many of us I will be attending the Christmas Market on the 10 December I will be attending the presentation of gifts to the Children of Fullborn Hospital in the usual way and I would mention in that context that members will be aware that we have been invited to put forward gifts for the children living at Barhill Hotel Councillor Bunty Waters who's had to leave us is working alongside the community's team to organise a small gift for all the children living at the hotel and there are over 90 children there who are part of families that are waiting for their asylum applications to be determined so if members do feel inclined to support that please contact the duty communities let the team know how many gifts you could contribute they will let you know the ages and genders of the children for whom gifts are still being sought so that is community.communities.scams.gov.uk for pledges or for further details and I do hope you can support that and with that I declare this meeting closed at 1647 thank you all very much for your participation thank you chair