 Rwy'n fawr, i fe allan o'r fawr, a'n hyn o'r llwyddon. Dwi'n fawr. Fawr iawn i'r gweithio o'r Fawr Cambritcher District Council, lle mae'r ddweud i'r ysgol yn ymgyrch o'r cymdeithasol. Mae'r ddweud yn Llanor Braddam, ac mae'r ddweud i'r Fawr Cambritcher District Council. Mae'r ddweud i'r ddweud i'r ddweud i'r ddweud. Felly, o gweithio'r rhagorau cwrdd, mae'r ddweud o'r Fawr Cymbritcher District Council May I now make a few housekeeping announcements? Please make sure that all mobile phones are switched to silent. Your microphones should please be kept switched off unless you are invited to speak. For those participating remotely when you are invited to address the meeting, please make sure that your microphone and camera are switched on and then when you finish addressing the meeting please turn your microphone and camera off. Please would Members who are attending remotely indicate a wish to speak through a chat message in the Teams meeting. Those present in the Chamber should indicate their wish to speak by raising their hand. I'll ask the Vice-Chair to note the order of speakers both virtually and in the room. The chat facility should not be used for any other purpose except where necessary to write down a simple amendment. Complex amendments should have been shared with democratic services in advance of meeting. When we move to a vote on any item and there is not clear affirmation, I will state that a recorded vote will be taken. Members in the Chamber will then vote electronically selecting for, against or abstain and the result will be displayed. So officers, can you confirm that the meeting is correct? Thank you. We can proceed. So firstly, apologies. Are there any apologies for absence? Chair, yes. Apologies for absence have been received from councillors Dr Tumi Hawkins, Pippa Halings and Richard Stobart. Thank you. I believe we have some members participating remotely. Can I just ask you if I can see councillor Dr Srebona Batitario? Can I ask is councillor Sunita Hansaraj taking part remotely? Yes. Great. Lovely. Just back from holiday. Grant, could you join us? So declarations have been... Oh sorry, yes. Oh hello, councillor Batitario. Good to see you too. Ah, councillor Lina Nieto. Thank you very much. Good. So you're taking part remotely. I understand councillor Michael Atkinson will be taking part remotely. Is that correct? Sorry, Atkins, I do apologise. And councillor Batitario, would you like to turn your camera off, councillor Batitario? Thank you. Councillor Atkins, did we hear you there? Yes, that's correct. Great. Lovely. Thank you. Thank you very much. So declarations... Sorry, councillor Hales. Thank you, chair. It's Susan Van Levin. She's obviously an officer of her apologies because she's on holiday. Okay. Thank you very much. So that's apologies. Thank you. Thank you very much, councillor Hales. No other hands. Great. Okay, so number two, declarations of interest. Does anyone have any declarations of interest to declare in relation to any item of business on the agenda? If any interest subsequently becomes apparent later on in the meeting, these would you raise it about that point? Councillor Leaming. Thank you, chair. I would like to declare an interest in agenda item 11, the Gamelin Gay Neighbourhood Plan. The agenda item refers to my employer, the Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire, and Gamelin Gaywood, which they own and manage. Thank you very much. I'm sure we've noted that. Are there any other declarations? Councillor Bridget Smith. I declare an interest in relation to item 11 as well. Prior to becoming leader of this council, I was employed by Gamelin Gay Parish Council to help support the work on the Neighbourhood Plan and as a result of which I will leave the room when that item is discussed. Thank you very much. One moment. Sorry, thank you very much. Councillor Hales. Thank you Chairman. Chairman, in regards to item 6, questions from the public, I noticed that the question is from Camborn Parish Council or Town Council, I should say rather sorry, and I wanted it to be known that I am a county council for Camborn. Thank you very much, Councillor Howell. Are there any other declarations of interest? Thank you, Councillor Heather Williams. Thank you, chair, just in relation to item 15, I'm a member of the Greater County Partnership Assembly. Thank you very much. And Councillor Paul Berge Park. I'm also a member of the Greater Cambridge Partnership Assembly. Thank you very much. Yes, and I can see Councillor Brian Mills. Did you want to? If we're declaring that as an interest, both Councillor Smith and myself are members of the Board and the substitute member of the Board. Which board? You're talking about GCP? GCP. Thank you. And Councillor Annaker. I can't read your centre. Thank you, chair. I was born. Sorry, yes, thank you. I'm also with Councillor Berge Park on the Assembly for GCP. Thank you very much. So, Democratic Services, have we got all those noted down? Thank you very much. I can't see any o hands. Thank you. May I remind members that, of course, many of these things would not need to be declared if they are already declared on your register of interests on the website. So please keep those up to date and inform Democratic Services of any changes. Thank you. Moving on to the minutes, which are on pages 1 to 16 of our agenda. Members are asked to approve the minutes of the meeting of the council held on the 22 of September. Just one item I had asked for was that on page 2 at item 6, questions from the public, second paragraph, I had asked for the inclusion of the words, a member of the public, Daniel Clarke, expressed concern, et cetera, to make it clear who he was. Does anybody else have any other items? I'll go through the pages. So, page 1, page 2, page 3, page 4, page 5, page 6, page 7, page 8, page 9, page 10, page 11, page 12, page 13, page 14, page 15, and page 16. So, with that, members, can I ask that are we able to approve these minutes with that amendment by affirmation? Lovely. Thank you very much. So, we agree the approval of the minutes by the minutes of the 22 of September as amended as a correct record by affirmation. Thank you. So, number five is announcements, and I'd like to make the following announcement. I'm delighted to announce that Councillor Peter Macdonald was recognised in the Local Government Information Units National Awards 2022 that he's worked to support local business recovery from the pandemic. This is testament to Councillor Macdonald's commitment to the business community, supported by the business team, and a whole council approach to ensuring that we help our businesses through what will no doubt continue to be difficult times. So, I'd like to congratulate Councillor Peter Macdonald. Thank you. Leader, do you wish to make any announcements? Yes, I'm afraid I've got a few. So, the first announcement is to warmly welcome the two new members who have succeeded in the recent by-election, Councillor Tom Bygott and Councillor Natalie Warren-Green. So, moving on. So, I'm sure you'd be pleased to know that the Mayor, Dr Nix Johnson, is out of hospital and is now recovering well at home. And we will hopefully see him back in Harnes after the new year. I had a very nice, spent a nice morning at the opening of the warm hub in Camborn. There was a lot of press interest in this, and again, a really brilliant example of community, our council and Cambridgeshire Acre working together. So, that was a good way to start the day. And then, in relation to members, particularly members of Cabinet, Councillor Judith Rippeth has stood down as a member of Cabinet, and I thank her wholeheartedly for all the work that she's done since May. In her place, Councillor Brian Milne's is going to take on the role of deputy. And I'm very pleased to say that Councillor Henry Batchelor is joining Cabinet and will be taking on responsibility for environment, waste and licensing. So, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Leader. Liz, do you have any announcements? Thank you. Right. So, members, we have with us a public speaker, Samantha Martin, who is Chair of Gamelin Gay Parish Council, who will be making a statement and asking a question in relation to the item on the making of the Gamelin Gay neighbourhood plan. As has been our practice on previous occasions, it would appear appropriate to hear this statement at the point when we consider the item on the neighbourhood plan. But, for that reason, I propose to move the order of business such that we allow item 11, the neighbourhood plan, to be considered immediately after item 6. May I seek a seconder? Councillor Williams. Thank you very much, Councillor Heather Williams. And does anybody wish to object to that? Thank you. Okay. So, are you content to take that decision by affirmation, members? Thank you very much. Is anybody wishing to vote against that or abstain? Thank you. So, the council therefore agrees that motion by affirmation. Thank you. So, we'll move to item 6, which is questions from the public. May I invite the public speaker, David Jones, of Camborntown Council to speak. Details of his question can be found in the supplementary question pack that we received, dated 21 November. So, thank you. Councillor Jones, would you like to raise your question? Thank you. At a recent meeting of Camborntown Council, we received a presentation from South Cambridgeshire Investment Partnership, Skip, on the proposed development of 260 homes on land at Cambornt Business Park. At this meeting, we were disappointed to learn that despite repeated requests from numerous local stakeholders, Skip are not proposing to provide a road connection between the Business Park and West Cambornt as part of their development. Land at Cambornt Business Park is allocated for residential development as part of the wider development of West Cambornt by policy SS8 of the South Cambridgeshire local plan. Paragraph 12G of this policy requires vehicle access through the Business Park and makes it clear that this access is critical to the integration of West Cambornt into the wider town. In addition, Paragraph 3.53 of this supporting text explains that the road access through the Business Park is key to the principle of allocating residential development on designated employment land, as it is considered that this will serve to better integrate West Cambornt with the rest of the town. This was understood when the District Council determined MCA's Alhion Planning application for West Cambornt, as whilst land ownership constraints prevented MCA from directly delivering the link road, the planning commission and subsequently approved design code secure the delivery of a primary spine road up to the boundary of the Business Park. In fact, the development of West Cambornt was only found to be acceptable on the basis that the opportunity would still exist to secure an access with any future application for land at the Business Park. The Office's report to planning committee states that the council would continue to encourage the delivery of all vehicular access through the Business Park. The provision of a link road through the Business Park is therefore not only key to the integration of West Cambornt with the rest of the town, but it is fundamental to the principle of allowing residential development on the Business Park. The provision of this link road is also critical to provide safe access for around 2,000 children attending Cambornt Village College and Hardwick and Cambornt Primary School. We understand that the principle that the Village College has written to the District Council to raise concerns about this. During the presentation by Skip, it was explained that they owned the land, the place for residential development, but not the road through the Business Park. It was explained that this is owned by Cambornt Business Park Limited, which in turn is owned by South Cambridgeshire District Council. But despite this, there remain certain ownership constraints that prevent the delivery of the link road. It was unclear exactly what these constraints were and I'm pleased to say that since their meeting we've had clarification that this is not the case. The land required to deliver the link road is wholly within the control of the District Council, but there is a cost attached to the works. Can Councillor Smith therefore please explain to the people of Cambornt why the integration of their town and the safety of around 2,000 of their children is now considered secondary to the wish of the council to profit from its role as a developer of 260 additional houses on a green space in the centre of our town. Thank you, Mr Jones. Leader, would you like to respond? Thank you. I'm sorry I've got my back to you. I'll try not to have it completely back to you. So thank you. Thank you for your question. So the current proposals by SKIP seek to deliver cycle, pedestrian and bus access between the Business Park and Camborn West, which I hope will benefit those 2,000 children. Policy SS Stroke 8 identifies the need to address a number of access issues. This includes, and I'm quoting, vehicular access between the Business Park and Camborn West, a Paragraph 12G, and bus prioritisation measures, including a bus link linking through to Great Camborn by the Camborn Business Park at Paragraph 12H. I understand that indications at the present time are that the quantum of traffic impact generated by the development by SKIP does not require access for private vehicles to be available from Camborn West. Meanwhile, the Business Park's site access road is not adopted, as you referenced. Opening up this link so that it formed one of the three primary access points into Camborn West would require costly physical works to rebuild and upgrade parts of the road and to secure its adoption. The transport effects of the development proposed by SKIP does not require such an upgrade. The current proposals would enable the realisation of bus prioritisation measures, listed in SS 8, without the need to upgrade the existing road. The cost of improving the road through the SKIP proposals would therefore need to be considered against the consequences that other infrastructure requirements set out for a development of this type. These include the provision of high quality green spaces, buildings with appropriate environmental performance and the need for infrastructure contributions towards education, community and health infrastructure. As we talked at length about last time we met, our local plan policy also requires the development to deliver affordable housings at levels up to 40%, and that is an absolute priority of this council. The council is passionate about encouraging a shift away from private car use to more sustainable modes of travel. To achieve this means prioritising journeys, especially local journeys, by non-car travel modes, over and above the use of private car wherever possible. Otherwise, the use of the car will remain the default mode in future, and there's already appropriate transport links that will allow for private cars to travel into and out of Campbell and West, and we've gone through these at length as well, and these have been assessed at the outline application stage. So whilst it will be a matter for SKIP whether they wish to argue for delivery of such a link to be prioritised over other infrastructure contributions, given that the development is unlikely to be able to fund all the policy objectives of the plan, the prioritisation of the respective policy objectives identified in your question, and those other policy directives across the local plan will ultimately be a matter for the planning committee to balance in due course. Thank you very much, Leader. Councillor Jones, do you have a supplementary question? I do, please, yes. Thank you. Go ahead. Councillor Smith, could you please confirm if there was a discount in the land paid from the site to allow for the cost of constructing the link road to West Campbell, and could you please confirm whether SKIP will be submitting a viability appraisal with a planning application to demonstrate the level of profit they expect to make from the site? Okay, thank you. All right. I think the best thing I can do, actually, is say that because there's a planning application imminent, I think I will arrange for a written response because I don't have that level of detail at my disposal. So you'll receive a written response which will appear in the minutes of this meeting, and we'll do that as quickly as we possibly can. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Chair. And thank you, Mr Jones. Thank you for attending the meeting and raising your questions. So we move on to item 6A, which is from Councillor Samantha Martin. This you can find on page one of the public questions and North Stowe Interim Community Supplement, and Councillor Martin is taking part remotely, I believe, by you there. Councillor Martin, do you want to turn your camera on? Thank you. You can hear us okay, obviously. Can we just check that we can? Can you hear me okay? Sorry, just one moment, please. Those who have declared an interest are leaving the room. Thank you. So, Councillor Martin, would you like to make your statement and ask your question? Good afternoon, and thank you for inviting me to speak today. I'm Samantha Martin, Chair of Gameligay Parish Council, and a member of our Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group. We are delighted that residents voted in support of our Neighbourhood Plan at the referendum on 10 November, and that the plan has now reached this final stage. It has taken over seven years to create, involved many, many meetings with our first taking place back in 2015, and involved hundreds of people from volunteers in the steering group to residents taking part in surveys and public meetings, and even consultations navigating COVID-19 restrictions. The culmination of all this work and extensive engagement with residents, businesses, landowners and statutory bodies is a plan which captures what makes Gameligay special to those who live and work there. It's rural feel, wealth of amenities and local businesses, and being part of a friendly community. The examiner highlighted in their report how they could see that the plan has promoted an inclusive approach to seeking the opinions of all concerned throughout the process. One of our defining characteristics is that we are a radial village. We have a central village core with satellite hamlets and easy access to the open countryside. The 10 policies in the plan have been written to enable planning officers and developers to shape development proposals which are appropriate for our village and seek to maintain the integrity of our landscape setting and reflect the strong character of our built heritage. These are supported by key views identified via the village design guide and the landscape and visual assessment. We also have policies which aim to improve non motorised travel within the parish and to encourage more walking, cycling and horse riding with developer contributions requested to support enhanced footway and cycleway networks identified in our cycle and footway improvement plan. There is an employment policy to support existing businesses and ensure retention of local jobs and policies to protect and enhance the natural environment and biodiversity of the parish, particularly Gamlingey Wood, a site of special scientific interest. The day per plan steering group have worked tirelessly on the plan and I'd like to give a special mention to members Rachel Lee, Sarah Groom, Chris Barker, Jerry Byrne and Kirsten Rayner whose collective knowledge and expertise have been invaluable throughout the creation of the plan. We are also grateful to the South Cambridge planning team for their support and all the technical requirements of the plan as well as our district councillor Bridget Smith for her support and encouragement throughout the plan's development. We are proud to have a neighbour plan which fulfills our vision to conserve our parish's distinctive character while nurturing and growing local employment and community facilities to ensure an outstanding quality of life for all residents. We therefore recommend this plan and ask you to formally adopt it at today's meeting so that Gamlingey can continue to be a thriving and sustainable community for all who live and work there. Thank you. We also have a question. Yes, thank you. Do go ahead with your question, Samantha. And our question is, we would like to offer some training to the area planning officers and councillors on the main characteristics and aspects of the plan and would like to know whether this can be arranged. Thank you. Could I ask Councillor Brian Mills to respond to the question? Thank you. Yes, thank you for that contribution and for your question and congratulations on the progression of your neighbourhood plan. The planning service would like to respond by welcoming an opportunity for the parish council to provide a briefing on the ambitions of the plan and it's an option to local members and the officers of the west area planning team. Thank you, Councillor Mills. And Councillor Martin, do you have any supplementary question? No, I don't. Thank you very much. So, firstly, thank you very much for managing to take part online. Congratulations on submitting your local plan. And also, could I just say thank you to Kirsten Rayner, the clerk to Gamelin Gay Parish Council, who has attended in person in case your line didn't work. So thank you very much to Kirsten Rayner as well. Thank you. I must now ask you, having attended remotely, can I ask you if you would now leave the meeting? If you want to follow the meeting... Oh, sorry, we need the discussion. Sorry, in a moment. Do stay in for the time being. Sorry, I do apologise. OK, so moving on to the substantive item of Gamelin Gay Neighbourhood Plan. So, sorry. Can I invite Councillor Brian Mills to present the report and move the recommendation. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. So, this is the seventh neighbourhood plan being brought forward to be made in South Cambridgeshire. And the work for this neighbourhood plan has taken seven years to develop and be brought forward. So, it's been something of an act of perseverance to get to this stage. So, congratulations again. It was formally submitted to us in August 2021 to take it through to the latest ages. And a referendum was held on the 10th of November this year, where 76.62% of those that voted were in favour of the neighbourhood plan. We need to make a neighbourhood plan within eight weeks of successful referendum, which is why we're doing that today. So, soon after the referendum. And once made, a neighbourhood plan becomes part of the local development plan. I'll leave the contributions to make on the overall vision for a later statement. And I want to thank Alison Tawkington until she retired in August. And that's a legionary in that time. And Samantha Johnson for their contributions. I was asked by Leader Bridget, who was very closely involved in the plan as a local member, to thank the following. Apologies, but not really for repeating, to Kirstin Rayner at the park, Dr Rachel Lee, Sarah Groom, Jackie McReady, or McEady, Dr Rickon Carrou, I think. I hope I pronounced that correctly. John Mercer, Chaz Barck, Jerry Byrne, and finally councillor Sam Martin, who we've just heard from. So, I recommend the report to the council and move the recommendation. Thank you. Thank you, councillor Milnes. Do you have a seconder for supporting the group? Thank you. Councillor Henry Batchelor, thank you. Do you wish to say anything now? I'll speak now, if that's okay, Chair. So, yeah, perfectly happy to second the recommendations in the papers. As someone that has two parishes within their division that has now adopted neighbourhood plans, I know firsthand the amount of time and effort that she goes into putting these together, however basic or complex neighbourhood plans are. And as someone that sat on the planning committee for some years now, I do know of the benefit of having an adopted neighbourhood plan in terms of the planning process. So, absolutely supportive of any parish that wants to put together a neighbourhood plan and commend all those that councillor Milnes mentioned for getting the gambling area plan together. So, happy to second this recommendation, Chair. Thank you very much, councillor Batchelor. Councillor Heather Williams, do you wish to speak? Yes, thank you, Chair. So, as others have said, a major congratulations to everybody involved and to the residents of Gamblingay for engaging in the process, as well as they have. The character of Gamblingay is very important to the residents that live there now, in the future, and also those that live outside of Gamblingay, particularly referring to parishes in my ward, Chair of Hatley, St George, and East Hatley, who feel very much aligned to Gamblingay and a lot of support from it. So, they'll be very pleased to see this go through equally. And I'm sure all planning committee members look forward to using it to its full capabilities. Thank you. Would anybody else like to make any comments? Okay, so, I would also like to congratulate the people who've been involved. All of us who have villages who have gone through the process of preparing a neighbourhood plan know just how much hard work and time it takes. So, well done. Thank you. So, we come to the recommendation, which is on page 43 of our agenda pack. And the recommendation is as written. It's notes that the referendum for the Gamblingay neighbourhood plan took place on November 22 and adopts or makes the Gamblingay neighbourhood plan as it was a successful referendum. And the made version of the plan is a appendix 1 of this report. Can I ask, does anyone wish to vote against these recommendations? Good. So, I'll take that by affirmation members. Can you, would you agree? Thank you very much. So, this council therefore agrees that recommendation, that motion, by affirmation. Thank you. And this would be the moment where if there was anybody taking part remotely in the public section of the meeting it would be appropriate to leave. They're welcome to take part in the live streaming of the meeting which is online. And we now have councillors Leeming and Smith back in the council chamber. Thank you. Moving on then to and back in our agenda to item 7, which is petitions. We have no petitions to consider. So, then we move rapidly on to item 8 which are the recommendations. So, 8A is the 2021-22 Provisional General Fund Revenue and Capital Out Term Cabinet recommendation of 14 November 2022 and that's on pages 17 to 23 of our agenda. And may I call on councillor John Williams, Leed Cabinet Member for Finance to present the report and move the recommendation. Thank you. I move the recommendations and you'll see that the unordied out term general fund revenue budget you'll find on paragraph 11 and the general fund capital program on paragraph 19. You'll see that the out turn was in the end very close to what we predicted regarding the revenue budget and as to the capital budget there was some slippage so the capital program will be leading to this financial year. Thank you very much councillor John Williams. Do you have a seconder? Thank you councillor John Bachelor. Do you wish to speak now? Yes, I'll speak now. Thank you very much. Not a lot to add other than this is really a pleasing result which is on budget and let's hope we can do the same in the coming year. Thanks. Admirably brief. Thank you very much. So, we're open for debate. Councillor Heather Williams. Thank you chair. I just have some questions on the project item. So, first of all in relation to page 18 we can see on the director under the director of greater came sharing planning there's quite a significant variance and on page 19 it does refer to an overspend of nearly 400,000 in relation to the kneecap development but I think we would appreciate a bit more explanation as to what that overspend really was towards. On page 29 just want to go through a few of these items. On the investment strategy on the top line I'd also say in the columns I think what it's actually meant to be actual spend today as opposed to actual cost because we don't know the actual cost and things going on so if you could just clarify that it should be actual spend. The investment strategy that doesn't seem to have been any sort of movement or action on and just given that our budget is dependent on investment income if we can have a bit of an explanation. Would you mind pausing a moment? We seem to have a problem in the chamber. Sorry to interrupt you. Thank you. Would you carry on? Thank you. Thank you chair. So that nothing's behind on the investment strategy as we've not, it's just as ongoing which I sort of mean is delayed. Then on the 270 Cambridge Science Park we were aware with some issues on that one around vacancies, just wondering how that's progressing. When it comes to the air quality monitoring equipment I think that might be an error because we can't have no-no and yes completed within budget that's not started so that might be a bit of a anomaly. The street lights on the project be good to know sort of how far correct is to the paragraph you're looking at or the place in the table. It's the next line which says street lights. Thank you. As to sort of how far behind we are and when we could foresee that being done on the last line chair aerial photography refresh now that sticks in my mind from the first budget and first one of these reports that I looked at when I first got elected it's been going on a very long time and I can see from page 31 it says about a legal matter and I'm just wondering whether that legal matter is resolvable given how long it's taken and we're talking about four five years and if it's not is it something that we should be rolling forward or sort of giving up on if we can't do it. So some clarification around that then on page 30 members laptops it says zero actual spend now I am aware that some councillers including myself have been given laptops so just clarifying that figures correct it may be that we're using old laptops or something that doesn't quite add up then when it comes to the council business CRM system just to note that Adele has left us so just wondering who the officer now with that is and then on page 32 it says about ongoing project being delayed for setbacks pandemic and unsatisfactory build work which project is the only one on there chair energy efficiency review whether that has inevitably ended up with some more cost or it might just be delays as opposed to cost so there are my questions thank you chair thank you very much so Councillor John Williams hope you're able to look down each of those questions thank you chair I mean obviously if I'd given this list beforehand I would have had the answer so we would have to provide a good response to those questions but can I emphasise that this is to do with last years this is to do with the not the current financial year but this is last the last financial year so some of your questions seem to be related to this financial year but nevertheless chair through you we will provide a written response to those questions thank you chair my questions relate to the documents put in front and I do believe are all relevant chair is there any question here that the lead member for finance can answer perhaps for example what the legal matter is or whether the errors are errors or not perhaps I mean the one that says no no and then yes surely you can answer that one which one are you referring to which line which line are you referring to page 29 air quality monitoring equipment I repeat I will give a written response to those questions thank you does anybody else have any questions with regard to the paper I have a question just a brief one and it refers to the perhaps you could also give me a written response to the cost relating to the vitrum building I don't understand the funding allocation and then the costs which was zero oh sorry page 29 line 3 on the table funding allocation was 10,000 and the actual costs are listed as 118,000 perhaps you could give a response to that I'm happy to give a written response to that thank you very much thank you so now Councillor Heather Williams I have a clarification question for your self chair is that the process now that all questions have to be submitted in advance or will we be able to hold cabinet to account in these meetings it's my understanding that you're always able to hold cabinet to account whether people have the information about precise questions is a different matter and I think it's perfectly reasonable that they make sure that they have the data available to them properly to give you a properly informed response Councillor Williams the chief executive is happy to answer some of those questions sorry do you find out if you're happy to if the head of finance is happy to answer those questions fine but they were put to me I do not have the information in front of me and therefore it's appropriate that I give a written response rather than try to answer a question off the top of my head but if the head of finance is prepared to answer some of those questions that's fine thank you very much Councillor Williams so Peter Maddow thank you so I'll try and take the questions in order so on the planning overspend I had some information about this earlier and I think it relates to the fact that we've struggled in recent times to a point people to posts and we've been using consultants in monitor areas so the consultants I believe that's the reason for the overspend there the need to use consultants in specific areas within the planning department which obviously cost rather more than if it was somebody who was in in post yeah that was a spend for the year so yeah 270 Science Park I did ask for some information on this so we have two tenants in place now whether they're actually in occupational I don't know but I know we've received the ranking deposits for those two properties for those two areas so we have two businesses in place of 270 and I know we're in negotiation with others but I don't know I don't think those negotiations have gone particularly far but they're obviously ongoing so I don't know when we have more detail on that investment strategy also air quality that's a no so the question was related what are you saying no to so sorry on that page we've got air quality monitoring this is appendix B towards the bottom there's 100,000 allocated in 21-22 and on the basis that it hasn't started it's obviously not being completed so you were saying the word in the final column should be no thank you very much yes it should be no on the street lights don't think I haven't asked particularly for that one that's probably something we might have to come back in writing on so that's the street lights aerial photography again I don't know what the legal issue is but again I suspect we can come back over there and answer on that member laptops no I don't think we should them until April if I'm honest but it's difficult to remember I think we have them in April but again I can make absolutely certain on that CRM system the greening project so some of the issues were to do with the car park my understanding is that the rectification of that was down to the contractor and they're picking up the cost for the rectification of them of that I'm not sure I can really comment on the picture in the building and that's probably something to come back in in response I think there was another one was it to do with the investment strategy to a question in the investment strategy as well thank you yes thank you top line investment strategy before 50,000 to zero and just that it's actual spend as opposed to actual cost I think you're best but thank you for your answers so what's happened with that one is that we have an allocation in the year and as the year goes on we allocate money out from the global budget there was 450,000 left or were you intending to carry out forward the issue out to the allocation for this year thank you so thank you that seems to be all the questions answered or undertaken to be provided as written answers any other questions doesn't look like it so members the recommendations we have are on page 17 and 18 I'm not going to read them out as they're quite lengthy so are you happy to accept these recommendations so anybody wish to vote against or abstain so this council therefore agrees that motion by affirmation thank you very much so we now move to item 9 which is the returning officers report of councillors elected on page 33 and 34 so may I call on the chief executive to present the report thank you chair and through you I have nothing to add to the report to congratulate the two new members thank you very much and we've already applauded them and we're very glad to see them here in the council chamber so item 10 then is political proportionality the paper for this is on page 35 to 42 of the agenda and can I call upon the democratic services manager Rebecca Dobson to present the report please thank you very much chair the long-standing by-election obviously changed the proportionality on the seats of the group political groups on the council and the figures are set out in the report with reference to paragraph 15 the aggregate figure for the liberal democrat group is 49 seats on the 62 seats available of the ordinary committees and the conservative entitlement is 13 seats moving through the report it sets out the requirements under the legislation to adhere to the proportionality across all of those seats to keep those same entitlements but applying the same proportionality as far as possible to the individual committees so appendix A sets out the application of those figures across the committee seats and in order to maintain that aggregate figure the two committees which have a similar as the same proportionality indicative figures which if they were rounded up or down would result in an incorrect overall allocation are the Audit and Corporate Governance Committee and the Employment and Staffing Committee there is a change on the licensing committee but that is a change that is reflected in the fact that the figures would not be capable of being rounded up across an incorrect overall amount so for the reduction of one in the licensing committee and the gain of one to the conservatives that is reflected in that table moving forward the discussions between the group leaders have resulted in a proposed committee seat allocation on table two a appendix A whereby the conservative group will now have two seats on the Audit and Corporate Governance Committee and seats on the Employment and Staffing Committee remain as they were and the change as I mentioned in licensing committee is 11 to the Liberal Democrats and three for the conservative group so moving on to appendix B the nominations for the seats on committees are set out in full and just in summary to note that as the Liberal Democrat Entitlement on Licensing Committee has reduced by one to 11 seats Councillor Peter McDonald will no longer be appointed to this committee and the conservative group Entitlement has increased by one to three seats and the conservative nomination for the additional places moving through to the Audit and Corporate Governance Committee Liberal Democrats Entitlement have been agreed to be reduced for this committee by one to five seats and so Councillor Joe Tales has come off that committee and the conservative group nomination is for Councillor Mark Howard to join that committee so the book committees are set out there and the recommendation is set out on the paper thank you thank you very much Miss Dobson so members are you content to take sorry yes we do I now propose the recommendations which are set out at page 35 and subsequent pages of the agenda can I second that book thank you very much Councillor Fane so does anybody wish to discuss this so are you happy to take that decision by affirmation members is anybody wishing to oppose or to abstain great thank you so that's the council agrees the motion by affirmation moving to item 12 we come to the report of the independent panel the scheme of members allowances for 2022-23 and that's on pages 139-154 of the agenda may I call on the chief finance officer to present the report please Peter thank you so the independent remuneration panel met on the 19th of October and they were looking at the scheme of members allowances for this financial year 2022-23 and their recommendation is included perhaps paragraph 2 okay thank you very much so we have the recommendations which are set out at page 139 of the pack can I ask if we have a proposal so Councillor Bridget Smith thank you now I'm concerned that the best of my knowledge there hasn't been much engagement between members of all parties and the panel so I would like to propose that option D on page 141 is approved and that is to seek further information or request the panel to undertake additional work if required do you have a seconder so Councillor Brian Milne's do you wish to speak now sorry unless anybody else wants to make a contribution so Councillor Heather Williams thank you chair I appreciate that D requires seeking further information and I would say there's been absolutely no engagement at all with ourselves however I do think that in the current climate and the continued second SRA my inclination is to reject what's currently down so I would be going for option B thank you chair very much I was going to speak thank you sorry just one moment so Councillor Lentol did you want to speak thank you chair just to echo what Councillor Williams said I've not been engaged with on this issue is the reluctant independence and I am completely appalled at the idea that members would be looking to increase their allowance in the current climate if we can stop that we should stop that point of clarification please I have no time so I said my concern was that there had been little if any consultation between members of all parties and the panel that was my reasons for recommending option D because that was exactly what you wanted to achieve there would be consultation thank you just a second that I would point out that there was a process or effectively deep diving on one process and then a gap so that the remuneration panel was able to take account of any significant changes in workload I remember very well in the early days of the previous administration that we spent some considerable time doing effectively time sheets for this none of that sort of work has been undertaken this time so I think absolutely no criticism of the panel just the process I think has been deficient in that respect and so I support this proposal to seek further information and request the panel to undertake additional work thank you I can't see anybody else wishing to speak so we have a proposal in front of us which has been seconded that we should in fact look at option D can I take a vote on that then that we're looking at option D do we need sorry you did that's quite right hang on thank you chair yes you did but there was a motion tabled and that motion needs to be considered first because it was proposed and seconded I think given that there's been an alternative motion put forward and we go straight to recorded vote yes so we're going to vote on whether we wish for the amended proposal which is to look at option D and I'd like to ask if we're set up for a vote if you wish to go for option D then I'll press the blue button to indicate that you're here and press to indicate I can't remember how to vote press the green button if you wish to go with option D press the red button if you wish to do something else against and yellow if you wish to abstain yeah so has everybody voted we've got a total of 33 does that all? just need to have a few just check so Councillor Jeff Harvey is a microphone that worked is that complete one moment I can see Councillor Harvey trying to find a microphone that has everybody voted we've got 35 votes and I think that counts for everybody in the room so that vote is carried so we will go with option D thank you right so moving on to item 13 can we just have a 5 minute break just to clarify something so it's just before 3 at the moment can we come back up 10 pass 3 thank you very much how long do you need 5 minutes would you like to come 10 minutes 10 pass 3 10 minutes 10 pass 3 please thank you very much so members we return to full councillor we're on item 13 of our agenda which is membership of committees and other bodies we have the lead sheets in our agenda pack on page roman 2 and also the supplementary pack that came out on on the 21st we think but subsequently we have had a page table but looking at it it becomes apparent that two items on that are we need to re just need to look at again so when we come to those I'll alert you to them so the council's asked to at roman 1 note the appointment of councillors on committees as set out in the report on political proportionality which we've already considered and this report set out the membership of committees where proportionality changed which accordingly we note at this point item roman 2 was in respect of the joint local planning advisory group we're asked to note the appointment of councillor Peter Sandford in place of councillor Aiden van der Bayer and the appointment of councillors John Lovelock and Henry Batchelor as 1st and 2nd substitute members so that's also for noting item 3 roman 3 is in respect of the grants advisory committee we note the appointment of Dr Martin Kahn as the 3rd substitute member and at item 4 where we're asked to note any other changes in roles membership or substitutes in respect of any other committee so at this point we refer to the supplementary pack for this item on page 1 under 13 roman 4a we are invited to endorse the election of councillor Peter Fein as chair of the planning committee so can I just note that we endorse that? We need to propose it in a second so I believe we have a proposal from councillor Henry Batchelor happy to propose councillor Fein as chair of planning as the outgoing chair and councillor Fein as currently the vice chair I can fully endorse councillor Fein's work rate, commitment and knowledge of the planning system so I know he will make an excellent chair so happy to propose councillor Fein Thank you very much and do we have a seconder for councillor Bridget Smith Thank you I'm delighted to be able to second this but I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank councillor Henry Batchelor for the more than sterling work he's done for a long time in that chair of planning role Thank you very much so members are you happy to take that decision by affirmation? Thank you anybody wishing to vote against that or abstain right so members thank you the council therefore agrees that proposal by affirmation congratulations councillor Fein continuing under that same sub number Roman 4 of item 13 on the supplementary paper invited to similarly endorse the election of councillor Jeff Harvey as vice chair of the planning committee and I believe councillor Batchelor are you proposing that? Yep, happy to propose councillor Harvey in a similar vein to councillor Fein councillor Harvey has been a member of the planning committee for some years now and is very diligent in his work and I know he will make a superb vice chair so happy to propose Thank you very much and I believe councillor Bridget Smith thank you very pleased to to second councillor Harvey particularly as he is so enthusiastic to do the role it's not often people thank me for offering them roles so that's a nice change No pressed men here, okay so members can we take that by affirmation then? Agree, thank you anybody wishing to vote against or abstain? Great so the council therefore agrees that proposal by affirmation and can I congratulate councillor Jeff Harvey so continuing on under the same Roman 4 of item 13 on the supplementary paper we are invited to note the changes notified by the leader of the Liberal Democrats group's membership of the committees as set out and are there any other changes in membership or substitutes of any committees to be announced by either group leader so councillor Heather Williams Thank you chair before I do though, good luck to councillor and Harvey in controlling us and planning committee I'm sure we will not behave well for you so good luck and can I say this will be the first time that I'll sit on planning committee where a bachelor is not at the top table so it's going to feel very strange so thank you to both the bachelor boys for their time for my own group this substitute will be myself coming off of scrutiny and councillor Tom Beigott going on to the scrutiny committee Thank you very much So we note these changes on scrutiny Thank you so continuing under item 13 but moving to Roman 5 we're asked to note and we're required endorsed changes to outside bodies appointments so the supplementary paper invites us to note sorry and the supplementary paper this one so this is the supplementary paper on the table it invites us to note the appointment has referred to an outside body the adults and health committee in addition members should have in front of them a paper table by the leader stating changes to the liberal democrat places on the temperature and Peterborough combined authority I just want to point out that two of those we're going to withdraw from this paper that is the reference to the membership of the Audit and Governance committee and the membership of the Overview and Scrutiny committee we just want to clarify those and we'll bring those back at the combined authority sorry are there any other changes to be noted sorry thank you sorry, 13V 5, Roman 5 we need to endorse the appointment of councillor Sunita Hansraj, a substitute member of the adults and health committee to fill the vacancy arising from the resignation of councillor Alex Malian so can I just ask that we if we are happy to take that by affirmation thank you and does anybody wish to object or abstain thank you so we can endorse that by affirmation and 13 Roman 6 is to note that the leader has appointed councillor Brian Milne's as deputy leader and councillor Henry Batchelor to join the cabinet the leader will report verbally on the cabinet portfolios thank you so are we happy to take those as noted yes does the leader wish to say anything nope so moving on we move to item 14 which is the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough combined authority and this is on pages 155 to 192 of our agenda packs councillor is invited to note the report on the works of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough combined authority as outlined in the agenda and do our representatives on the combined authority have any comments that they wish to make councillor Richard Smith just very briefly an improvement board has been established and Lord Curslake is chairing it and they meet for the first time in January an improvement framework has already been established has been worked through and the chief executives of all the partner authorities are all heavily involved which is good news there's a senior management restructure under place the e-scooter trial has been extended until 2024 and a certain amount I think £50,000 was allocated to the independent climate commission to identify what further work needs to be done on its delivery plan thank you very much so do you have any questions members for our representatives councillor Williams thank you chair through yourself a couple of things just if the leader could express I'm sure the wishes of everybody across the council in wishing the mayor well in his recovery we often will robustly disagree but people's help I think we should all make sure that we look out for each other on that front but with that if the leader could just give us a view as to whether she thinks in the interim while understandably the mayor is taking leave that there is adequate checks and balances in place at the combined authority thank you chair thank you councillor Heather Williams so councillor Bridget Smith thank you very much we have in fact been in contact with the mayor this week in order to send everybody in this authority so yes councillor Anna Smith who is the current leader of Cambridge City has stepped into the role of deputy mayor and so she is filling the mayor's shoes she's doing it really well actually there's a big governance review underway at the moment which I had a meeting about this week which seems to be progressing very positively the interim chief executive Gordon Mitchell is going to be reckoned with working very very closely with all of our chief executives I'm feeling recently confident that things are moving in the direction that we should all wish lovely when the mayor is back but his absence is not slowing progress down in any way thank you councillor Dan Lentill thank you chair I'm sure that anyone who was taught by Anna Smith at Hills Road as I was would be very excited by all the things she's going to achieve in this interim period and obviously to express best wishes to the mayor for his full and total recovery thank you so we note the report of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough combined authority item 15 is the greater Cambridge partnership the papers are on pages 193 to 200 of our agenda and we're invited to note the report Members do you have any questions for our representatives on the GCP board Councillor Heather Williams not a question but just something that might intrigue people is when they read through the assembly section that's quite a brief summary the minutes of the meeting are actually 60 pages and I would encourage actually if you want a fair reflection of the meeting to read the 60 pages in full the chair was very pleased they didn't have to sign every page which you can imagine at the last meeting thank you very much any other questions so that item then is noted thank you so moving on to item 16 which is the Oxford Cambridge regional partnership which is on pages 201 to 210 of our agenda may I invite Councillor Bridgesmith to speak to this thank you I think that the paper is self-explanatory there's also two letters attached the most significant which comes from Peter Northover who's Deputy Director at the Department of Leveling Up confirming the payment of the first tranche of £250,000 to allow the work of this new pan regional partnership to progress the focus at the moment is on getting a team of people together to deliver I think I mentioned last time that this is a very different entity from what went before the focus is on the environment and on the economy which I think is something that's much easier for us all to feel more positive about thank you very much and members that's her the Williams thank you thank you through your self-chair obviously the ops cam arc has been somewhat of a frustration for members about not really being able to ascertain what the vision this council is representing at those meetings and that's something I feel like I'm channeling Councillor Nick Wright when I say about the vision for self cams there so my questions are around the governance and transparency requirements of the way things are being set up and we now see minutes or agendas of these meetings and what steps is the leader taking to ensure this transparency through this process and so that members of this council actually get to find out this time what is being said on behalf of us by the leader and second question chair will the leader ensure us that nothing that she agrees to will result in additional housing development in south Cambridgeshire Councillor Bridget Smith thank you so the arc what was the arc leaders group which consists of representation for all three parties in negotiations to get us to this point of agreeing a pan regional partnership have absolutely insisted that the there are proper minutes that there's proper transparency over this because we have all been extremely frustrated that it's been because it's been a government project with government absolutely in control of it they wouldn't even let us create a website but I'll say that came from the minister but we've been absolutely insistent that as we move forward this needs to be open and transparent in exactly the way that we all wish and there will be an independent chair of the board so hopefully I think we're going to now be working on the governance to ensure that on housing you know the priorities of this is economy and environment I'm not expecting to be told suddenly told housing is a part of it they're quite clear and what the minister has said is this about economy and environment so those will be the projects and schemes that are put forward and I believe as things stand at the moment I'm continuing to lead on the environment and I'm having some interesting conversations about environmental enhancements that could be greatly beneficial to all of us Thank you leader and councillor Heather Williams Thank you chair I appreciate the answer given there was a specific question that didn't get responded to one of which was around housing will the leader confirm to us that she will not agree so we want a commitment that no additional housing will be an agreement whether it comes up in the future or not and the other thing was about the agreement of the minutes and the transparency because as was the case before chair we don't have to be part of this and we could have withdrawn then on transparency grounds On the point about minutes it seemed to me that councillor Smith answered that question by making it quite clear that she wanted minutes and agendas to be published but did you want to respond to the second one councillor Bridget Smith So without I fully understand why you're asking that question but I can't predetermine myself by being category in that way I am told that housing the government's intention is no longer that this area is a focus for the same sort of housing development they have said and very much in response to what the leaders of all political persuasions across the arc have said that our priorities are the environment and the economy and we see those as being where the opportunities are and the past narrative on housing was unacceptable to all of us Now again, the money comes from government this will be led by it will still be led by government in reality and it is not my expectation that housing is going to be a feature of it but I cannot predetermine myself until we know more there is no if this transpired into something that was not acceptable to us then we would withdraw from it So under a point of information to be clear the local councils have applied to government to continue this project therefore it's not government led government have agreed to allow them to carry on but it would be incorrect to say that it's going to be government led project this is something the councils wanted and applied to government to do Thank you It's a government funded project and that's quite clear from the letter that says it's a government sponsored project probably better way of putting it Thank you Okay, councillor Dan Lentill Sorry, a point of clarification Chair How do we establish as a council whether we're in favour of this Oxcam of development we've not had a debate over it in my time and I don't believe there's been one in the Liberal Democrat group So my concern is that one person from the council is making an awful lot of policy that is going to have an awful lot of impact on an awful lot of people's lives which isn't a particularly Liberal or Democratic thing to do So it's not at the Oxcamarch it's an Oxford, Cambridge pan regional partnership there is money an opportunity associated with it we're not making policy it's councils that make policy this pan regional partnership has no powers to make policy it has no powers to grant planning permission what it will do is hopefully distribute money to projects that benefit the environment and the economy policy is made by people like us here Councillor Heather Williams Thank you The council's policy is to pursue this partnership that is this council's policy I believe as it currently stands that could change Do you wish to respond? So it's our view that being part of this partnership is potentially in our interests because there is money that comes with the partnership hopefully there's money that will come and benefit South Cambridges hopefully there are opportunities to deliver environmental and economic schemes that would not be able to deliver by ourselves in isolation it builds on it's essentially strengthens our arm I should point out that the combined authority as the growth board is part of it it would be very odd for us to distance ourselves from it when the combined authority is a member of it as well Thank you Councillor Dunlenn tell Did you want to come back? I just think it's better that the council has a conversation about what it wants as a council from the Oxcam regional partnership or whatever it's being called this week this is a hugely controversial project it's a hugely impactful project it may be a series of funding grants it may be a whole bunch of things but we should talk about it here in full council and not have these decisions being taken by our person Do you have a question Councillor Dunlenn? Sorry Does the leader not think it would be better to have a conversation here in full council about what we're doing with this Oxcam thing because we didn't have one when I was in the Lib Dem group and we haven't had one here Is there going to be a consultation? Councillor Smith This is a Liberal Democrat administration at South Cams Liberal Democrat administration and this is in the best interest of South Cambridges to be part of this partnership Thank you very much So with that we'll move on to item 17 which is questions from councillors These are listed on pages Roman 2 3 of the agenda and indeed on 4 So the first one is and remember you're reminded that there's a period of 30 minutes for all the questions This includes those questions where notice has been provided as set out on the agenda and if there is still time remaining after the questions we've noticed have been dealt with, we'll deal with any other questions which have been notified to the Democratic Services Manager before the start of this meeting Can I just check whether they're happening? No, there are no additional questions OK, so Firstly 17a, a question from councillor Dan Lentel Can we take your question? I'm happy for it to be as read Thank you very much So I believe councillor Brian Mills is going to be replied If councillor Lentel is happy for me to do so I'll publish the full paper with the workings out all the citations and references you can possibly earn for and summarise them here in response so that we don't take all the time in the world So your question councillor Lentel challenges the statistics behind the claim that there is a linkage between income and ownership and the answer is yes especially according to the O&S the lowest 10% of the population are much less likely to have access to a car and in the second part of your question you're wanting to understand if there's data about your willing and over ward and there are four statistical neighbourhoods known as lower super-outward areas LS, OAs and among these a proportion of households with no car ranges from 12.8% in the most deprived LSOA in the ward to 3.9% in the least deprived area So yes rural communities show link between lower or no income and lower car ownership too Finally, lower income households who run a car spend a disproportionate amount of their household income in doing so O&S family expenditure survey data shows that the families in the lowest income 20% spend about 16% of their income running cars with the equivalent figure of around 12% for those on the highest incomes So we are therefore satisfied that the data supports our contentious contention that unapproved bus service sorry I can't read my own writing, I'll just start that again So we're satisfied that the data supports our contentious that unapproved bus services helps the least well off most Thank you very much Point of order, those are national statistics Are they Cambridge statistics? Chancellor Lentel, just a moment I was going to come back and ask if you had a supplementary question Do you have a point of order? Point of order, the question is is there data that specifically references Cambridge not national statistics because I don't know whether that includes the Scottish Highlands or the Orkney Islands or I don't know but the question is specifically is the data there for Cambridge? I think we'll take that as a supplementary question I'm sorry that's not a supplementary question In fact it wasn't a point of order either it was a point of information but I was letting you have that So, Chancellor Mills would you like to respond to that? My answer Reference Office of National Statistics on a national basis because that's the data that we've got and because you question the establishment of the linkage between income and car ownership and that answers that question National Lentel, can I remind you you addressed your questions to me? Through the check, nationally those are national statistics Do you wish to respond? You've responded Councillor Lentel, would you like to move on to your supplementary question? So my supplementary question is is there data that will show what the impact of a congestion charge would be on those households that are just about able to afford a car a lot of which are in my constituency of Overham William but will not be able to run a car after the congestion charge has been introduced and therefore their social mobility, their social inclusion will be affected greatly and I appreciate that there are promises of exemptions and all the rest of it but if wishes or horses but local statistics, local data regional data I understood that you want local data the impact on the people who are just about managing Councillor Mills I think if Councillor Lentel will allow me I would suggest that what we've done in the answer here the documented citations and references that I made reference to will answer some of that but the question is whether or not enhanced bus services that is the proposal before is out for consultation right now will improve the availability of transport at a lower cost and I think that is well established by the evidence that we've provided Thank you very much Councillor Heather Williams Your question 17B That's on the order paper chair Thank you so leader Thank you Councillor Williams So the most recent quarterly figures for the Greater Cambridge Planning Enforcement which is actually now called compliance team shows that for South Cams area we received 322 complaints on planning and related matters and at that time the team processed and were able to close 417 cases there was a backlog so that shows how well they are dealing with the backlog that built up during Covid so over that same period we issued 6 breach of condition notices 8 enforcement notices 2 listed building enforcement notices I kind of want to say I have the partridge in a pear tree here 2 section 215 untidy land notices 1 tree replacement notice 1 temporary stop notice 1 high hedges remedial notice and 7 planning contravention notices so they've been really busy So with the support of the transformation team the shared planning service has also expanded the use of the council's planning software to include planning compliance case management and I think that will have a tremendous impact because that will allow more efficient case management as well as improved online reporting which will allow complainants to report a complaint and upload photos and videos as we do for flight tipping So the advice on the shared planning website has also been revised recently to provide additional information on the enforcement process and I think there's a video there as well and in November the service presented a revised draft planning compliance policy the consultation direct oral answer if she is the leader happy yes or no well I think the fact I am very happy I'm very happy with the with the progress that's been made and I thought you'd be interested in knowing knowing about that progress So the answer is yes that you are I'm happy with the progress that's been made Thank you I do thank you and thank you for the direct answer My supplementary question is how much has this council paid in compensation for the last four years for failing to enforce planning conditions and in relation to planning there's an ombudsman report that clearly shows that this council is offering and being forced in some cases to pay compensation for the injustice caused by the fault of this council in not enforcing planning applications could have an answer to how much tax payers mullies will spend on compensation please chair Thank you It seems very unlikely that information would be available at the door If I'd have noticed that then I would have been able to access that information so I know you don't like getting things in writing but I'm afraid I'm going to have to provide you the answer in writing unless some verac is being personalised with their fingertips which they don't So we'll come back to you as quickly as we can on that So four members if you want to ask supplementary questions that are like you to a list to require data it's good to submit them at the same time as you submit your first question Canceler Graham Coe you've got 17C Thank you chair as on the order paper Thank you So Councillor Smith Thank you So I'm not aware of any complaints being closed by mistake but I also know that no process is totally infallible and if this has happened the complainant only has to contact us or me and point it out and it will be reopened and the investigation completed Thank you Did you have a supplementary Councillor Coe? So I am aware of some and I'm happy to talk about that outside of the meeting I think Members of the public are particularly concerned that the council sort of stripped them of their rights to go to the ombasmen because of the complaints not being completed being marked complete when they're not by mistake but I'm happy to take that outside of the meeting Thank you, that sounds like something that needs to be If I may respond So We don't strip anybody of their rights to go to the ombasmen Of course we don't but occasionally complaints reach the end of a process and they are closed even though a complainant might not agree that they should be but there is a process and sometimes we reach the end of it and people aren't satisfied so in these cases our internal processes reach the limit of what it can achieve and if the complainant remains unhappy they have the option of making a second stage complaint or of contacting the ombasmen as appropriate I don't think there's any way that we can strip them of their right to do it so I'm looking at our legal officer because I don't think we can do that No we can't It's a right Thank you I believe the words work feel as if they've been stripped because of course they only have 12 months to appeal and go to the ombasmen after they're dissatisfied as you say if they haven't had a result of their initial inquiry and they go beyond that time frame then the ombasmen will say they're too late and I believe that information is useful to give the leader as context So if that's the case then I'm sorry but I do hope that the more efficient a web based system we have which allows for monitoring of the process now means that people won't be able to be in ignorance of what stage their complaint has got to so I think hopefully the process we've got now means that if these situations have risen in the past they won't rise again Thank you very much So councillor Sue Ellington with your question at 17D Thank you German as on the board of papers Thank you very much so leader Thank you I think it's very obvious on our website that stage 1 complaints are expected to get a response within 10 working days Sometimes these complaints are really complicated in which case 20 working days is deemed to be reasonable and for second stage complaints the target is 20 working days but again for really really complicated ones that goes to 30 so that's what's deemed to be reasonable Thank you and councillor Ellington did you have a supplementary? I do thank you chairman I think the leader might want to look at a complaint which was received in 2019 and has not been addressed and maybe you are aware of it but obviously because of the PRP it might be better if we discuss this outside of a meeting Thank you very much councillor Ellington I'm sure you can engage with did the leader want to speak? Yes so I'm sure that Geoff memory is aware on this he's done a massive piece of work to deal with a backlog that's been really really successful and but there have been some tricky ones of this but either bring it to Mr memory's attention or to my attention Thank you very much leader So moving on question 17 Ease from councillor Richard Williams Thank you chairman question is on the order paper Thank you so leader Thank you so I don't normally read answers but actually I will in this case so the first thing to be really clear about is that the housing levels identified in the first proposals that our joint local plan are based on very very detailed modelling of the evidence of the forecast of economic growth in this area up to 2041 and the housing needs for those future employees So this results in a figure which is above the government's minimum standard method of calculating objectively assessed need for housing and other uses noting that the government guidance is clear the standard method is a minimum and there can be circumstances and of course we are a high growth area and our growth continues to exceed many many predictions So as councillor knows if the identified need for homes and work spaces in that evidence are not to be provided then we need to be clear about the consequences of not doing so and that includes negative impact on economic growth encouraging greater in commuting because people can't afford to live here they can't find a house here so they have to go and live elsewhere and then commute in to work here and also the price of housing which is already outrageously expensive in this area whether you're renting or buying and it's a priority of this administration that sustainable housing is delivered close to where people work thereby making car ownership optional and also hopefully impacting on people's cost of living so the first proposals publication were very clear that proposals contained within the document were contingent upon their being adequate water supply available so the responsibility as I think most people know for resolving this key issue lives not with the council but with the water companies and they are responsible for and indeed have an obligation a statutory obligation to provide water to meet local needs and including its agencies such as the environment agency who define and agree the plans of water companies so we just had last Monday had the publication of water resources IS report and again that's quite clear that we are a very water stressed area so for some time now both this council and the city have been lobbying the water industry and government hard in an effort to ensure that they take order to address our shared concerns for the environment caused by water abstraction in particular and as we move forward to the next 12.7a direct all answer I think the leader has established that she does not accept that it is this council and therefore time to move on the leader is entitled to give excuse me councillor the leader is entitled to give answer she is entitled to give thank you we are it is our courtesy to listen thank you as we move towards the next stage we will be looking hard at the evidence of water supply across the new plan period and when we have the Cambridge water and Anglia waters forthcoming resource management plans it will help us understand what their proposals mean perhaps the council would like to ask the government what they are going to do about this problem thank you and as far as I am aware we have how many minutes left Rebecca we have 13 minutes left so it is time to get through these item 17 supplementary sorry yes do you carry on thank you chair I will attempt to be brief but that was a very long answer I seem to have a habit of provoking written answers which are quite long just to make a few points but I will come to my question the leader said that the housing numbers are based on detail modelling there certainly is modelling but it is impressionistic there are questions of judgement here and we shouldn't pretend otherwise in fact information I have from officers of council which they have been very happy to disclose much though I am interested in we need you to speak slowly enough to hear what you are saying I was trying to leave space for other people but there are questions of judgement involved in those numbers beyond standard method Cambridge ahead for example who seems to have a lot of influence on this only this morning published their housing dashboard which contained two completely different figures about employment growth over the last three years 3% or 4% two different measures CBR or Bress they give very very different measures now the council has chosen a data point within a range of permissible data so let's not pretend that there aren't questions of judgement in any case on to the water issue you are quite right that we now have more detail and it is now very clear that the water is not going to be there Fenoresevoire is not going to come online until the late 2030s about 70% of the water increased water supply in the water resource east management plan is not going to come until the end of our plan period so between 2039 and 2041 is it not time that we rethink these numbers because it is simply unsustainable on our own data tells us building beyond standard method is unsustainable, thank you what was your question councillor Williams a question was is it not time that we revisit the numbers we now know a lot more about the water resource plan what's actually going to come when it's going to come is it not now time to rethink the plan that was put forward last year thank you can leader would you like to respond to that okay so we are revisiting the numbers because that's part of the proper process to revisit the numbers and can I just make a point that Cambridge ahead have no influence over this authority it is evidence based it is evidence based hard evidence and yes we will be revisiting the numbers thank you very much councillor doctor sorry yes I know thank you councillor doctor thank you very much yes my question is on the on the agenda so leader okay so the Camborn High Street is a privately owned site and we've had a lot of engagement between our shared planning service and the town council and the land owner the commercial land owner of this site and there have been pre-application discussions with the developer which have centred around a mix of retail and residential residential development now because we know that this is really important to Camborn but because there are real concerns over the commercial viability of developing this site which is why it hasn't built out thus far because the viability doesn't really stack up the planning officers have advised that subject to justification they are prepared to be flexible in respect of the affordable housing requirements doing everything we can to make it as easy as possible for the commercial developer to deliver this amenity for Camborn so with the town council the joint director of planning has also met with the applicant to work through design challenges associated with the site's shape and size because we know that Camborn wants facilities that are the high standard that Camborn deserves they don't want something that is suboptimal use an awful word that's probably enough for now thank you very much so councillor dr Bhartitaria did you have a supplementary? yes I have a supplementary question because I am listening this answer for last couple of years three years from now the same answers nothing there is no progress and no improvement can leader please explain a little bit more on the privately owned privately ownership issue and how can council also work with that privately ownership issue along with so how can the council work with the private owners to achieve a satisfactory solution so as I said our planning service and the town council have met with the owner of the site and the developer of the site now since the substantive meetings obviously the economic environment has worsened for all developers so building anything is much more challenging now than it was planning officers have been in contact with the agents for the land owner recently and we've been told by the private land owner that he or she does not need anything further from the council at this time so we have offered further help and we've been told that they don't need anymore so I'm awaiting positive news from the land owner but in the meantime I absolutely share your ambition to see the high street of Camborn developed thank you very much so item 17g is a question from councillor Tom Beigott councillor Beigott big chairman Members will recall my question last July about the drying up of Kingfisher pond in Northstone and the report on the groundwater issue in Longstanton an action plan was promised but in 16 months nothing has ever been made public as question on the order of paper asks where is the action plan thank you leader so I have to disagree with you I'm afraid so an action plan was developed between us and Longstanton parish council and the measures in that plan were implemented or are underway the action plan is available to view online on our website along with all the other reports and an FAQ there's a vast amount of information available on the website if you choose to go and look there ongoing investigation of the Northstone town council are also continuing so we are being completely open and transparent and the action plan is available on the website thank you councillor Beigott did you have a further question thank you chairman so is the fact that there is this action plan just a PR face saving exercise for the council to project this reputation or is it there to actually resolve the underlying problems leader I don't think either Longstanton parish council or Northstone town council would let us get away with a PR piece of work to protect our reputations we're working very closely with both councils extremely closely with Northstone these days and I believe our Northstone town council I think are very pleased with the progress that we've made thank you very much that's all our questions asked and answered thank you very much everyone would people like since we've had a further hour would you like a short break before we move on into motions yes my question okay I suggest we have a ten minute break before we move to motions five minute break so let's reconvene at how about seven minutes past thank you very much so thank you members we reconvene in the pool council on the 24th of November so we're at item 18 notices of motion you're reminded that a maximum period of 30 minutes is allowed for each motion to be moved seconded and debated including dealing with any amendments at the expiry of the 30 minute period debate will cease immediately and the mover of the original motion or if the original motion has been amended the mover of that amendment now forming a substantive motion will have the right of reply and the motion or amendment is put to the vote so the first one we have is item A standing in the name of Councillor Heather Williams would you move your motion please thank you chair I think it's pretty self-explanatory but I will elaborate on a few points in that other councils are making representations as part of the consultation process and it's something that actually we often do when patients come up is do a response on behalf of the council I appreciate that that is normally taken by cabinet and I think there probably is room for that process to happen and most importantly I think it's really important that we really make sure that we are clear as a council how we will be representing people we need to be very clear what our vision is that's why parties tend to do manifestos like now we are very clear in ours that we didn't support the road charging which is coming through the administration may have different views on that but what is come out of this process is a lack of certainty as to how this council is actually representing people so I hope that at least that part will be acknowledged, taken on board and acted on what happens at the GCP is a decision made by essentially one member of this council of which we are 45 the reason that I am asking for the consultation response to include opposition to the congestion charge or sustainable travel zone as has been used is that the impact on our residents in South Cambridgeshire will be huge it's something that they haven't had really any say on will have a consultation where there's lots of targeted things on social media but there's plenty of people throughout the district that seriously just do not have any idea that this is happening and we don't want to be in a situation I believe where this has happened to them and this council hasn't responded hasn't said a thing so I would like to move this motion chair and also just point out that many of us have had to use Adam Brooks, Royal Patworth and that there will be future hospitals on that site, we know that and can we in clear conscience look residents in the eye if we are to include those areas and I just think that we should be making it very clear that we will stand up for residents' views and that we will not include those and although the county council will have the ultimate responsibility chair we do have a voice at the GCP several of us sit in different layers of it and right now if somebody asks me what this council as a whole view on it was we wouldn't know really what to say because what said in one breath feels like it's reversed in the other we don't actually know what the view is there's no plan B that's been proposed if there is one it would be nice to hear it and I really would encourage all of council to support the motion bearing mind the impact it will have on our residents Thank you, do you have a second up? I'm happy to second the motion chair Do you wish to reserve your right to speak or speak now? I'm happy to speak now actually chair that's okay I support this motion and really just wanted to echo the things that Councillor Heather Williams has said on this I think it's really important that this council has a stance on congestion charging and the active travel I think that for us not to put in a response so residents don't know where we stand on this issue would be lacking on our part and you know I've had a lot of responses from residents regarding this issue and they've been really really broad so whether it's doctors, nurses, teachers lower paid individuals people with electric vehicles people that live inside the zone people that live outside of the zone you know a great fan man in terms of painters decorators, plumbers electricians who have got concerns small businesses all of these have been people are concerned about these proposals and I think we owe it to them to have a stance on this I suppose I'd better declare an interest in that I do work on the Edinburgh site as part of this motion and I know many of the staff are very concerned about this at Adam Brooks Hospital Can I just check Councillor Cone do you feel that in what regarding declaring your interest I'm just declaring an interest in that I work on site and Adam Brooks and the Royal Patworth Hospital is included but I'm not paid by Adam Brooks Hospital so I don't feel I've got a pecuniary interest there but thank you chair ok so we're open for debate then members Councillor Mills thank you chair so as Councillor Williams pointed out pointed out this council is a voting member of the GCP anybody else could you bring your microphone just a bit closer Brian thank you I'll try from the dire from darling thank you as I was saying this council is a voting member of the GCP board and it's the GCP's proposal that's out for public consultation that is the way that our residents are going to be able to contribute to this process and we insisted that there were many free form entry points into that consultation document so that residents could express all details of views that they held and share them with us that consultation process will finish on the 23rd of December at which time the views of the public has expressed during that consultation process will be analysed, quantified and assessed and after that has been done we will have a very firm view of exactly what the people that have responded have said so it would be completely pre-emptive to make some sort of decision on the behalf of the residents before we've solicited their views which we are doing right now and we would encourage as many of our residents in the district to respond as they possibly can thank you very much Councillor Nelms I believe Councillor Sue Ellington would like to speak thank you Jen I think that a lot of our residents are unable or unaware of how to respond many of the elderly people that I speak to and as the oldest person in this chamber I think I can speak for him I know that if you go to Cambridge and you have a large amount of shopping to do you can't carry it you can't get on and off the bus sometimes because it is so difficult with your arthritis and your steak and your walking aid and all there are a large in my village I'm very fortunate that we have the guided bus but I am told because I don't use it or don't have to use it that those people who do want to use it frequently find that they have to wait for three or four buses before they can find one then get on it is active travel is fine in principle but there are so many people who need to be exempt let's take the blue badge holder now we're told I believe although detail hasn't passed my eyes I've only had it as rumour that two people a blue badge holder would be able to nominate two cars in which they can ride but a blue badge holder has the right to ride in any car and be exempt how will that affect them what about I am the white van man I have to declare I have a pest control company and the white van man or it's actually the white van woman my daughter rides in and out of Cambridge frequently to do jobs and may actually have to enter more than once in one day how's it going to affect them the community car scheme they've approached me they believe they will actually fold if this scheme goes ahead because they frequently have to send two drivers in one to take the patient to Agenbrooks and one to fetch them home because the waiting times for patients even when they have an appointment can be extended and how will that affect those people who have to use the community car scheme I really feel that the Q&As that came out last week told me absolutely nothing and did not answer any of the questions I've just posed so I really feel that this needs to be carefully thought out and our response as a council needs to reflect many of those concerns thank you thank you Councillor Ellington Councillor Richard Williams thank you very much chair I'm obviously speaking in support of this motion I understand the political difficulty that the administration of the council is in but it isn't really credible to say that the public consultation is the only way for views to be expressed this council and the administration for example didn't feel inhibited about expressing a view a very strong view very clear view was put forward about east west rail so why is it okay to express a view clearly in support of east west rail but we apparently can't express any view at all as a corporate council about this proposal which affects every single one of our residents it is just simply not credible there as elected representatives we have an obligation to speak on behalf of our residents and there is as every member in this chamber will know because I'm sure you're all getting the same emails that I'm getting serious concern about these proposals and the fact that people feel they have no alternative other than to use the car now yes increased bus services to the extent that our increased bus services are very welcome to pretend that the increased buses that are being offered are a realistic alternative for most people is just simply nonsense frankly I mean I have a community in my ward Heathfield which isn't even on the map when it comes to the increased bus services there's nothing for Heathfield at all you know so when I get emails from people in Heathfield what you know I'm worried about the impact this is going to have on me you can't even say well you'll get an increased bus service so I'll say there are concerns from across the district and it is the responsibility of this council to articulate a clear view one of the problems with this proposal I would suggest is the fact that it is being fronted up by an organisation that people don't understand they don't feel they have any democratic control over and the political leadership of the GCP is absolutely nowhere to be seen this proposal is being fronted up by officers who are being sent out to basically present a political proposal I was at the southern forum I see some skeptical faces the southern forum of the GCP the other night who was there fronting up this proposal it was officers because the politicians are nowhere to be seen so people feel that this charge is going to seriously affect their lives and it is being imposed upon them by a body that they feel have no democratic control over they don't understand and it is the obligation of elected representatives to make their views clear so that we can all be held accountable by the electorate we also have a question from councillor Mark Howell very much indeed, chairman taken on board what has been said by councillor Mills I ask all those who are responding to the actual what has been put out the consultation document to think of this my main concern is with regards to Adambrooke's hospital obviously the Royal Papwith hospital as I have used to be in Pap with Everard but also the Rosie and also the Children's Hospital so if you want to go and visit your child in hospital in the day and go and sit with them for the day it's going to cost you approximately we don't know figures but since London is £15 it could cost you a tenner that could cost you £50 a week obviously it will also be charged in London on the weekends so we could be talking to go and visit your child in hospital several hundred pounds and then you've got family members who also want to come in and as we've been told social economics do pay part of it we've already heard that earlier on and social economics is very important here because the lower down of the actual economic scale you are the more likely your child is to be admitted into hospital as an inpatient so what we're actually doing we're actually hitting the hardest part of society to go and visit their own children in the Rosie, in Adambrooke's and also in the new children's hospital we've also got our vulnerable adults to consider sorry I'm projecting we've also got our vulnerable adults to consider vulnerable adults also have people come in to sit with them whether they be carers or other family members the care prices will go up or maybe they sit there alone because they can't afford the carers to come in these are all concerns that really have to be considered on board what is said with regards to the responses I ask all of you who are going to respond to think of these particular issues of the children and the parents and of the vulnerable adults thank you general thank you councillor Howell is there anybody else who would like to speak on this? councillor Lentaw thank you chair could I remind members when you're making your points there to me thank you chair I think I am the only person in this room I may be wrong who once upon a time in 2005 voted in a public referendum in favour of a congestion charge in Edinburgh and funnily enough 60% of the people in the city voted and most of them were not in favour of paying more tax I was a student I didn't have a driving licence lived in the central town and didn't have kids fun days didn't pay tax so why not why not shove the burden of creating transport and environmental justice on to those least able to pay with a flat rate poll tax now I'm not quite old enough to remember the poll tax as a thing either the 1381 although councillor Lentaw councillor Lentaw or the 1980 1990s one a flat rate tax paid equally by Dukes and Usmen and that's what we're proposing to do and the idea that social justice has to be given up in order to have environmental justice we're very fortunate to have on our throne now a man who's dedicated his entire life and frequently had hesitated his personal reputation to the notion that you cannot have environmental justice unless there is also social justice and the simple question you got to ask yourself is is there equity here of impact, is there equity of incident and quite clearly those who are the poorest those who are the sickest those who are least able to absorb hundreds if not thousands of pounds they're going to be the most effective the idea that the heroes who got us through the worst days of Covid that we're going to give them an after-tax pay cut of hundreds if not thousands of pounds a year the idea that we're going to charge people who need to be able to get to the hospital in order to have chemo or to use the over and willingham long stand and swaves if that even still exists this is crazy and the idea that we as a council don't get to have a say that we don't get to turn around and say you know what yeah I can understand historic medieval market town maybe in the right in the centre but definitely not the hospitals and certainly not the park and the idea that council Anna Bailey of East Cambridgeshire district council she gets a public say but this council doesn't yeah no that's a real problem here and the simple question that everybody here has to has to ask is simple this I am winding up councillor we're all politicians and it comes down to voting 40% of the people who voted Lib Dem in Longstand Okington and North Stowe 40% of the people who voted Lib Dem in May and we do so in November you know and Edinburgh Tram and a 40% drop in votes I'm not sure what further knowledge you need from your own residents but this is a terrible idea thank you chair would anybody else like to speak on this? no I can't see any hands up okay so we come to Councillor Heather Williams thank you chair so a couple of things before members go to the vote is to I'd ask them just to reflect on whether their residents when they stood for election or anything else were fully aware of the potential introduction of this charge and so do they have a mandate to plough on and if we don't say no we don't support this motion that is essentially what we're saying I'd also say in relation to car ownership on low incomes that's very very true in urban areas less so in rural areas because of the public transport constraints and I do acknowledge that there's proposed improvements to buses but buses alone will not resolve the issues and will not get the modal shift from most of our rural areas we are over 100 parishes so it's just not it's not the right answers and when it comes to people that have got in touch it's as council council said to so many people people caring for elderly relatives and I have to reflect on something that was said about parents and I very much hope that I am the only council in this room that has had to do this but I stood beside my daughter when she was not breathing at all the silence and the horrific moment that is I have been there and watched a parent drop to the floor as their child flatlined and didn't recover I would have been lucky enough if I wanted to visit again I could because I could afford to there will be people can you imagine leaving your child in hospital when they've just stopped breathing is the hardest thing a parent will ever do then having it as a consideration for your wallet whether you can go back when I can tell you every single fibre of your being will be urging you to get back to that hospital as quickly as you can I will not put that extra trauma in front of people and so I may sound over-passionate some might say I don't know my motivation you will not I hope have ever experienced that I wouldn't wish it on anybody but putting a financial barrier in those parents way to access and see their children we just we can't do it in my view thank you chair thank you very much and so we'll move to the vote so members confirm we've got the vote so those in favour of the motion will vote green those opposing the motion will hit the red button and those abstaining will use the yellow button do you know how many members we have in the room at the moment at 35 earlier didn't we I think we've all voted if we still have okay so we have 35 members in the room okay so that motion falls with 25 votes against and 8 votes for 2 votes to abstain that vote is lost moving on to item 18 be standing in the name of Councillor Tom Bygott Councillor Bygott would you like to move your motion thank you thank you Jim the law is a thin layer that separates civilization from barbarism we are very fortunate to live in a society governed by the rule of law where most people are honest and the law is respected sadly that is not the case everywhere putting more resources into planning enforcement is an essential part of preventing a culture of lawlessness from taking hold it is not the only part but it is a necessary part there is a theory in general policing that leaving a broken window un-mended can lead to more serious crimes when it is seen that the window is not repaired more windows are broken people become afraid to visit and criminals see it as an opportunity to move in the owner of the window may worry about the expense of fixing it but in the long run the cost of doing so can be much higher we should think about what broken windows we have on display in the planning area lest a lack of enforcement is taken advantage of many years ago when I first became a councillor first time a local business erected an advertising sign next to the A14 within a day a planning enforcement officer had asked them to take it down they apologized saying that they had no idea that planning permission was required or how to obtain it an honest mistake but one quickly rectified in a more recent case last June hot tub Superstore signs appeared at junctions along the A14 these look similar to official road signs with a clever pictogram and a couple relaxing in a hot tub I reported them last September but many still remain in the Swedish and Drydredgan junctions and I don't know the full details about what these signs are and why they're there but it seems to me that it's a very public place to advertise lack standards of enforcement another example is in Drydredgan where a developer was able to get away without providing any affordable housing because it was thought too onerous and time-consuming for someone to visit with a tape measure to see whether the development exceeded a thousand square meters or not I'm sure that other members can think of many other examples and of course the council's response to the groundwater problems in Longstown to a north stone has been far too slow and inadequate we may have many other problems in the planning area and I'm sure we're all aware of what those problems are but sending a strong message that South Camp is a place where the rules are expected, obeyed and enforced is a good investment in deterring further and possibly more serious breaches from occurring in the future as the old saying goes a stitch in time saves nine thank you thank you councillor Bygot do you have a seconder councillor Richard Williams is seconding, do you wish to speak now do you wish to reserve I'll speak at the end right just so we're open for debate members would anyone like to speak to that councillor bachelor did you register to speak yes I'm hoping my name's been written on the list if I'm top I'll begin so chair my view on this is that the motion is at odds with the underlying principles associated with planning enforcement in that each case must be considered upon its own merits having regard to the specific site circumstances this is clear in the national planning practice guidance which requires authorities to seek resolution in the most expeditious way and making sure that enforcement action when taken is appropriate and justified by the harm arising from it to assist this objective the council are consulting shortly on a revised compliance policy which along with performance standards aims to make clear the council's expectations an approach to all future investigations I'd also point out the council has recently recruited additional staff to the newly named compliance team including a new team leader who'll be starting in January so I appreciate that a bit wathily so I can summarise very quickly for you so essentially planning compliance is a discretionary legal process that isn't always very fast moving so whilst it may not seem on the surface that things are happening I think in the majority of cases things have been happening in the background but may not always be publicly visible as of January the compliance team will be fully staffed so hopefully service will improve and also there is a forthcoming consultation on a revised compliance policy so I would encourage all members to engage with that if there is an interest there so as a result of that I tend to disagree with the thrust of this motion and what it's trying to ask this council to do so I won't be supporting thank you chair thank you very much councillor bachelor councillor Richard Williams I was going to speak at the end sorry councillor Sue Ellington sorry I apologise I have concerns about enforcement in that a number of issues have come before this council and brought by me over 12 months ago and the issues is that if we're not going to enforce it we shouldn't impose it if we set produce conditions that people blatantly do not comply with we should not be making we should not do it because it makes us look a fold for a start and I do agree entirely with councillor by got in that take for example fly tipping if you have a fly tip just one fly tip you will find that within a very short space of time if it doesn't being cleared up there are several more placed in the same place and we really do need to get on to our enforcement much more aggressively in my view thank you thank you councillor Ellington councillor Hales thank you chair I found this motion a little troubling if I may that our conservative colleagues seem to be criticising officers for their work you must be pointed out that I've often been called or even contacted if you wish by officers late into the evening at the weekend Saturday and the last time was only two weeks ago on a Sunday so I know these these officers' works are very very hard I find it disappointing as well that some of our members failed to recognise the amount of hard work that the planning team in itself have been transferring over to the new service so I truly believe our officers going well beyond what I think is called the extra mile here and I would like to use this opportunity to thank those officers publicly for their undying commitment to this council's planning service and on that basis I will not be supporting this motion thank you thank you very much councillor Hales thank you so first of all was something that might clear things up for all members there's nothing in here that says anything about officers not working hard or anything like that we as was mentioned earlier actually we are responsible for setting policy officers have the remit of the policies that we give them outside of that it's completely out of their control if we want to see more planning enforcement it's down to us to give that directive and that's what this motion seeks to do we have choices as to how we resource certain departments for example we have repetitively tried to add resources to planning enforcement and put budget proposals forward to increase the capacity in that department that's not because we feel anybody's not doing their jobs it's because we feel actually we need more of them it's not good enough to expect them to go above and beyond what they're being asked to do I would say as well chair that those requests for extra resources in that department have always been voted down when we've proposed them in relation to this motion this is about how we set our policy there are too many cases where and let's be clear the enforcement officers don't actually decide whether enforcement action is taken or not that's not their remit they're there to investigate and that's why I say this cannot be anything about reflection on our planning enforcement officers because these decisions are not their decisions but we see cases that are on there from when I started as a counciller some are very complex and I appreciate that that's why they need more resources but that's never come I remember sitting on planning committee with Linton application and seeing videos of flooding footage that was because we hadn't enforced we hadn't taken the action in Swayze we had a situation where a retrospective application came to planning committee we know that comes at a cost not for the members of public not because of us councillers costing but because of the process of producing report and everything else committee said no we then didn't enforce the decision of this planning committee that those houses shouldn't be there and so they've now they're sat there without commission but we're not taking any enforcement action so things like that make a mockery of the system I believe so what we would like is for the public to have a clear view by supporting this motion that if this council says no no means no thank you councillor Stephen Drew thank you councillor Byger opened up his presentation the motion by referring to the fact that the rule of law is the thing that separates civilization I believe you the word barbarity but I apologise if that wasn't the word you used in principle or what you were saying I wholeheartedly concur I wholeheartedly concur with the principle that the rule of law is absolutely essential to everything in society and I believe that everyone should do so on the 8th of September 2020 the Northern Ireland Minister Brandon Lewis stood up in the House of Commons and said that the government would choose to break international law in a limited and specific way I believe this is entirely relevant to this discussion on the grounds that councillor Byger opened the motion by saying that the rule of law separates civilization from barbarity therefore I do not believe I am taking it outside of the specific and relevant bits of the district council's work since councillor Byger brought into a philosophical discussion so I thoroughly agree with councillor Byger that it is the rule of law and it is absolutely essential I would just suggest to build on the broken window policy that if it is the case that government ministers decided it is okay for the government to break the law in a limited and specific way that they are not just breaking a window they are taking a pile of stones and smashing every single window that exists in society therefore I would call councillor Byger its attention to the fact that unfortunately I believe that a minister in the government of which his party is the lead it is our government not their government or your government thank you councillor Williams no no no I do not agree with you councillor Williams no councillor Williams it is not the government is made up by the conservative think of information chair the speaker has not accepted your point of information I don't accept it the government is it is not my government I did not vote for an elect it it is not my government the reason councillor Williams why you wish to insist that people refer to it as their government is in line with your political beliefs it is not a fact it is your political belief I do not accept it Can I just ask you to continue with your point rather than addressing what has been addressed by councillor Williams there is a question chair if another councillor interrupts one councillor and wishes to make a point of information point of reference is the councillor who is being challenged not allowed to respond to the challenge made my ruling is final so councillor Dru do please carry on sorry just to be clear your ruling is that I am not allowed to respond to councillor Williams challenged what I have said you are to a certain point at which point my rule takes precedent but you are very I am going to give you a few extra minutes because the entire time I do not need a few extra minutes so a few extra seconds I would also just say that I intend to vote against this motion not because I do not support the concept of the rule of law but fundamentally I do not believe this motion is necessary I believe that the officers of South Cambridge district council are completing exactly what councillor bygat refers to in his motion and therefore for the council to vote is an entirely unnecessary action and therefore I will not be supporting it thank you councillor Dru for the clarification of that point a member is entitled to respond to a point of information but at the point at which I feel it is being taken to to too long a discussion I will cut in thank you so now we come back to your second I cannot see anybody else to speak on that so we oh sorry councillor Cahn perhaps the only member councillor here who has actually been worked in a planning department for 20 years in a local authority where 30 years ago 35 years ago there was then a terrible problem with enforcement it is a complicated procedure there are lots of levels people can divert and extend the process it is not easy I feel that the way that this being presented is an insult to our own staff because it is implying that the staff are not enthusiastic and not proving into their work the procedure they have to go through are legally determined we follow it, we try the major constraint has been inability to appoint staff you have to remember that over the last 20 years or so 15 years or so public sector wages have been kept behind inflation we are not competitive so it is extremely difficult we have done our best the staff have done their best the planners involved have done their best I lawed their activity I am sorry about the delays but that is an inevitable effect of lack of staff and lack of the extended process if they want to change the process the party empowering government could do that because it is determined by national legislation we have to work with the legislation that we oppose for so it is difficult if you want to stop something you have to use an enforcement stop notice which involves high levels of compensation if you don't succeed which is only done in extremis so we are left with positions where you are left in limbo for years it is what we are it is what we have but this is not to blame the staff I would lawd the staff I would upset about the fact that criticism is effectively of the enthusiasm and the ability of staff being a personal explanation and I would be supporting this motion thank you what did you wish to say Councillor? it has been made quite clear by several members that this is not a reflection of staff but merely policy what have you taken? Councillor Lentel I just want to thank Councillor Martin Carn for his very youthful peace because it is His Majesty's Government and I don't quite understand what Northern Ireland has got to do with this debate I appreciate I was in a politician 12 months ago but this kind of debate guys this is a chair this is exactly the kind of nonsense that the public cannot stand you could have put an amendment in to say please don't take this personally staff we think you are fabulous but instead you turned it into a bunch of nonsense and party buffoonery so I really don't know how I am going to vote on this I object to the language that Councillor Lentel is using did you want to make a point Councillor Lentel I wish that every single contribution could be of the quality that Councillor Martin Carn just made that is all there are no further requests to speak so I am going to come to the second Councillor Richard Williams thank you very much chair I am obviously speaking in support of this motion I just addressed a few points actually that have come up in the debate if I can I think it is ridiculous to claim that this is criticising officers and I have to say since I have been on this council it has become a constant theme that the administration frankly hides behind officers every criticism the administration is presented as if it is a criticism of officers which is ridiculous there is a political administration of this council the political administration of the council is responsible for what goes on in the council and criticising the council is about criticising the administration it is not about criticising officers of course the officers work incredibly hard we all know this the planning officers work incredibly hard in the main planning department but you know the planning officers have been clear that because they are under resourced we have had cases go for non-determination to appeal because they simply don't have the resources to manage the workload that is not a criticism of the officers it is a criticism of the political administration of the council and the way it runs the council and it is the same with enforcement so please not hear any more nonsense about you can't dare criticise the council because every criticism is regarded as a criticism of officers that's patent nonsense we all know that there are problems with planning enforcement and Councillor Bygott has put his case very eloquently and we have as a group in the past moved amendments to increase resources for planning enforcement we all know the case work I have great respect for Councillor Batchelor but I would take his point a bit more seriously if we hadn't both sat on planning committee in my case two years now with the same cases and enforcement coming back every single time it's not a criticism of the officers they're under resourced and they need more support to do their work so I fully support this motion and I think it is planning enforcement is an important area it matters very much to residents and it's something that I think this council needs to take more seriously and resource Thank you Councillor Richard Williams so Councillor Tom Bygott would you like to sum up? Thank you Jim so thank you very much for taking part in that debate I think some quite interesting points were made I particularly liked Councillor Ellington's point about fly tipping as being another good analogy besides broken windows if you leave a problem unattended then it will just continue to grow and you need to deal with that problem at the beginning I'm looking forward to seeing the consultation Councillor Henry Batchelor mentioned I did start the debate by talking about a general philosophy but I think there is a very big difference between general philosophy and political mudslinging and I particularly like what Councillor Lentl had to say about the fact that the public don't really like politicians constantly slagging each other off this is one of the... Councillor Bygott this is one of the things that many people said to me on the doorsteps in Longstown that people don't like this constant to and fro your group said this your group said that having better enforcement, planning enforcement is something that is in interests of everybody here in this chamber and of all of our residents and I think the main thing that I want to reply to is saying that this motion is a criticism of officers is certainly not a criticism of officers they do work incredibly hard but policy setting is very clearly in the domain of councillors and even more importantly for this resource setting is in the domain of councillors and as Councillor Richard Williams had said we have put this issue before to say that we do need more resources in planning enforcement that is a policy decision here it is not a criticism of the few officers we have we need more officers and we need to be supporting them more now my recollection is that there is a budget up in February that actually had an additional spending item for more enforcement so that is really the area that we need to be focusing on we need more resources and we need as councillors to be setting the policy direction to say this is something that is very important and we need more enforcement thank you thank you Councillor Bygot I will ask if anybody else is requesting to speak and we have already had the summing up I will move to the vote on the motion so Erin if you could set up the vote press the blue button to indicate you are here and then if you support the motion press green if you oppose the motion press red and if you have staying press yellow and we have got a count for 35 which seems like everybody just to keep this on the ball so you need to we all need to mark our our voting clearly thank you with that we have 8 votes for the motion 27 against and no abstentions so that motion is lost thank you thank you thank you thank you members moving on to item 18C that is the motion standing in the name of Councillor Graham Cohn Councillor Cohn would you like to move your motion thank you chair it is as on the order paper I have put this motion forward as many of my residents believe there has been smoke while some smoke and mirrors with regards to the driving force behind the relocation of the water treatment plant this council holds a lot of power in that the relocation only happens if the 8000 houses are allocated to the kneecap site within our local plan this means if we as a council decide to have less housing numbers within our local plan or relocate the houses a large area of green belt would not be developed full transparency on this issue is really important in text and maps within the local plan document this council gave no preference in the consultation as to which site should be selected I believe this motion will enable fair consultation within the local plan on this issue Do you have a seconder? That's ahead of Williams Do you wish to speak now? Thank you chair I'll speak now so we need to be open and transparent with residents we've had that conversation earlier on and we've also had it explained to us by officers and everyone else that the local plan and the relocation are what's been described as so they are linked there is no clear separation there's no actual operational reason to move it it's for development of a brownfield site for housing so I think to say and to not include those that sort of area and sort of pretend like it's something separate to the local plan I think is an error of judgement that has been made previously and I think it's it doesn't wash well with the public and we can quite understand why so this motion very much seeks to address the issue of previously the council failing to give a view as to which site would be best we might not always be popular in every ward I appreciate chair as a council but we are here to make decisions and I think we have an obligation to be honest with which site actually this council supports so we are seeking to rectify that this was not the right site and also to clearly distinguish where the proposed relocation is in the local plan documentation we are talking about text maps and just having it clearly identified on there I don't think that this motion is asking particularly a lot but what it will do is give a lot more confidence in the process and that we are being open with the public so I very much hope that you know people will get behind this because the residents in that locality really are wanting to see some leadership from this council and currently don't feel that it's happening so I will second the motion there thank you very much I note your seconding so we have a number of people who wish to speak one of which I can't read Councillor Milne thank you chair so the movement construction of a new wards treatment plant is outside of this council's control and remit as it's a nationally significant infrastructure project a development consent order is the means of sustained permission for such developments the accepted bid of 193 million of housing infrastructure funding to be used to relocate the wards treatment plant came from the CPCA, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough combined authority in March 2018 both the CPCA and this council were under different political control at that time have you finished Councillor Milne's have you finished Councillor Milne's of course I'm sorry it's always helpful if people say thank you at the end so I know that they've actually finished thank you very much so our next speaker is Councillor Hoffman thank you I'm pleased to see the local Conservatives see the consequences from their original proposal to move the sewage works before having any idea where it would be moved to the Honeyhill site was also a very likely location as the water company had tried to move into this location before I do believe somewhere around 2005 it is now too late for this council to have significant influence on the plant location as this is now in the hands of the central Conservative Government thank you very much thank you very much Councillor Hoffman Councillor John Williams thank you chair I am at the time I was an opposition councillor on this council and this came to the planning portfolio holders meeting and I remember at the time the decision was taken by the Conservative administration and some of the Conservative councillors here today were part of that administration to seek to ask the government to fund the relocation of the water treatment work so that it could be replaced with housing and that included the mayor who was at that time Conservative now and it's interesting that at the time and I have to say it's on record you can look at the minutes of that meeting because no one because no one could tell me where it was going to be relocated to but it's pretty obvious that given Angren Water and the county council which at the time was also Conservative controlled had attempted to relocate it to Honey Hill it was a pretty good bet that if you backed that bid it was going to go to Honey Hill and that's the reason why I did not support that because I know for real that Honey Hill is a suitable place for the sewage waterworks however unlike and I respect my colleague Councillor Hoffman but I think the horse has bolted and my experience before I became a counciller is that if a local council refuses to have any dealings with a large development like this because it's been explained this is an infrastructure of national importance the council does not engage in that then the outcome is pretty bad for its residents and I'm thinking of Uttlesford and Stansford Airport where Uttlesford instructed its officers that it was opposed to the Stansford Airport application and that application and they refused it and that application went to appeal and supply supplies Uttlesford had no input into that 106 agreement or to the conditions that were then applied by the planning inspector and there's very little difference between that and what the Conservative opposition is now asking us to do so yes I'm sad that Honeyhill has been chosen I don't think it was the right place for it but it was pretty obvious that's where it was going to go and it's pretty obvious when the Conservatives supported the bid and the Conservative government accepted the bid that's where it was going to go and to anybody to say otherwise I think it's been disingenuous but having where we are now it is better for us to be working with the Penguin Water to ensure that we get a development that is acceptable to us and acceptable to the local community thank you thank you Councillor Williams and Councillor Richard Williams okay thank you very much chair to say that we're I think the line that seems to be pushed here is that this is nothing to do with us the local planning authority we've got nothing to do with planning we're just the local planning authority all we do is propose a local plan and we approve housing developments absolutely ridiculous to pretend that this council has got no influence over this process I would observe myself that is not what was said but do carry on I think you're supposed to be neutral not well I think you're supposed to be neutral chair not criticising individual speakers I'm not criticising, I'm making a point of information well thank you we will differ in our opinions on what was said because that's the gist of what is being said you know if we chose a different path for the local plan if we decided that we would not build to the extent that it has been decided to build over the standard method and as I said earlier there is a choice in that there is a question of judgement about how much you would go over standard method very welcome actually that councillor Smith mentioned earlier that the numbers might be reviewed that would be a very good thing but we do have choices in how we choose to develop and the level at which we choose to develop and if we were to take a different path which yes facilitated housing growth in the area nobody is suggesting that we don't have housing growth in this area and economic developments a question of the level and what's sustainable if we took a different lower approach we would be able to make different choices now only 1,900 houses according to the draft area action plan are actually allocated for the core site up until 2041 in the draft plan that's actually a very small percentage or small amount of the housing that is at least the current first proposals in our plan so we could easily establish that actually that site did not need to be developed and make the political choice that we wouldn't develop that site and therefore remove the need for the reallocation of the sewage works these are current decisions there will be decisions before this council over the coming years for example to formally approve the area action plan would it with a case that a conservative administration 5 years ago can somehow reach 10 years into the future and dictate what happens at a point where it's long since lost control Members let the Councillor Richard Williams finish Would that with a case it is just ludicrous for members to try to pretend that they have no choice about this physically what they want to pretend they've got no choice about it but it is just ludicrous and the people of Horningsea and Fendett-Nevillebourne and Honeyhill will see it as ridiculous Thank you Councillor Williams So I can't see anybody else for a decision to speak so we'll return to Councillor Coe Thank you Thank you very much chair I'll try and pick up on some of those points I think it was mentioned by Councillor Millins about the you know applications running in tandem essentially of there being two separate planning proposals to which I agree with they are definitely two separate planning proposals but one doesn't happen without the other if we don't have the houses within this local plan that we as councillors are constructing the water treatment plan would not move because the HIF agreement would fall so they are literally handing glove on that point I accept the points that Councillor Richard Williams makes about housing numbers and that we could reallocate those numbers or have less within our local plan so I'll try to remember all the points that were made in terms of who's to blame and whose fault it is I don't really care if it's Conservative, Liberal Democrat or we have a choice we could stop this now if we wanted to but we don't want to because we've put this within our local plan in the current local plan that was constructed in the past there were no housing numbers allocated to this site not a single one we didn't know which site was going to be picked which is why there was a consultation on that it's a real shame that this council chose just to sit on the fence and comment not one I utter on that on those proposals so I think we should vote in favour for this motion and give people transparency we could stop this it's our choice it's council's choice to put those housing numbers in our local plan we didn't previously we are now if we don't the HIF agreement will fall and the water treatment plan won't move we now know where the site for the water treatment plan is we have to give residents the ability to consult on that and say look there's going to be a huge area of green belt taken out in this location are you happy with that and I don't think it's made clear in the current documents so I think it should be changed as this motion indicates thank you thank you councillor Cohn we haven't got anybody else who wishes to speak so I'm going to move to the vote so Erin if you could set that up so if you're in favour of the motion plus green if you object the motion plus red and if you have stain press yellow so we need two more votes I think somewhere along the line so if you voted your vote shows along the bottom with the two other buttons on either side so we're back to 35 so members that is nine votes in favour so we have nine votes in favour 25 against and one abstention so that motion is lost thank you members that completes all the motions that we have today so I just wanted to point out me moving on to item 19 the chair's engagements I'm invited to note I'm inviting you to note the chair's engagements and I just wanted to point out that the events in November were both at the United States Air Force the Veterans Day ceremony which was attended by the Vice-Chair and the annual Thanksgiving service and Pie Social was also USAF so thank you very much for that the date of the next meeting please put it in your diaries Tuesday the 21st of February 2023 at 2pm the next item on our agenda which isn't on the agenda pack but which has come in as a supplementary is Northstone Interim Community Facilities which is the second supplementary agenda pack which looks like this and we're looking at pages 5 to 16 can I remind members that it comprises a report and an appendix and for reasons of commercial sensitivity the appendix is exempt from publication so members if you are content to confine yourself to discussion of a report we can have that in open debate and I would prefer that we do that but if you wish to speak to items contained in the exempt appendix you should indicate you wish to do that and in which case we would take a vote on whether to proceed to that item in private but for the time being we'll proceed in open forum so I'll invite Councillor Bill Handley to present the report certainly pause a moment does anybody wish now to register that they wish to speak on the exempt items no okay good thank you so Councillor Handley would you like to present the report thank you thank you chair the report summarises the situation prevailing now but it is a situation that's changing rapidly the interim facility we propose will be located on council owned land and it will be in the form of a modular building which could can be adapted to well it will first of all be able to support the community demand now but could be extended if it became necessary later and that's the beauty of this particular idea so I don't think I really need to say very much more about it officers are working very hard to get the quotations in for the various modular buildings but obviously we need to have council's approval to proceed along these lines so I would just draw to your attention the recommendation which is on page 6 to purchase a modular building excuse me to purchase or rent a modular building for the interim community facility and place the interim facility on council owned land thank you councillor Handley do you have a seconder I'm just using councillor the leader thank you do you wish to speak now no I'll wait for the end so does anybody wish to speak on this councillor Heather Williams to go ahead thank you chair and thank you for this item coming to for council today I've been on so many committees in the last couple of weeks I don't know which one it was that I raised I think it was scrutiny I've got thumbs up from the chair for that part at least that this has come forward because we didn't want any more delays so thank you for officers work on this I'd also say that I'm pleased with the option that's been chosen those who are members prior to May will know that this was an option that we had available to us back then and I heavily supported and backed as I didn't believe the original proposal of buying the two homes and changing them would be viable and would work because of we didn't have certainty over the constraints so not the way you want to find out you were right chair is by the public having delays and being let down but we are at least now back to where we were and I hope that this will be pursued I'm not going to go into the detail chair of the final page because we want to have this open debate in open session which it wasn't last time which is a shame really because going for this option I came under I think we can agree on our side at least with severe criticism and heckling and law knows what else on this subject so nice to know we're back on the same path and I very much hope that in future when members of myself or my group put forward things like that immediately dismissed as being on political grounds because we have very practical concerns those practical concerns were correct and that has resulted in delays so hopefully we will be listened to in future in relation to the details having looked back there is a financial discrepancy not discrepancy is an error but there's a difference between when the option was with us and now there has been a lot change in the markets and that probably is to do with it so I would just like to know if the change in the costings between this option previously and now is a result of increased cost delay or whether it's because we just haven't done enough work on it at the time thank you chair but happy to support my original preferred choice Thank you Councillor Smith Do you want to respond Because I can't see any other Can I ask the officer, Kirsten Ard, who's been leading on this picks up some of those points and then I will at the end as well Give her an opportunity to talk for goodness sake Sorry, would you like Kirsten Donaldson to speak first or do you want to speak first or do you want to speak first Okay, Kirsten It's great to hear from you, thank you Just to confirm that the change in the costs quoted in the exempt report and that which was previously put in front of the council is partly increased costs in the market during that time but it's largely driven by the fact that the facility that we're quoting on now is considerably larger than the very very temporary looking unit that we were looking at initially Thank you, Kirsten So, Llywydd, would you like to There are no other questioners Okay, thank you So, nobody wants this to happen without any more delays more than I do and the members of Norstow Town Council and Councillor Handley so absolutely it's imperative that things move forward as fast as we can So the option of a modular building was never dismissed, it was always an option it was given considerable consideration but the choice that was made at the time, which regrettably has had to be dismissed decision on that was based on deliverability and cost we were aware that we needed to get something sorted as quickly as we possibly could however, the reasons that have been well explained, that's no longer an option when I've had Councillor Handley and I have had meetings with officers, we've asked for the spec of this modular building to be generous because as more and more people live in Norstow so the demands on the community facilities are going to get bigger and bigger we really don't want to find that after a few months actually it's not big enough and it's not meeting the needs so that I know has been taken on board we've had a bit of indication on cost they are indicative, a lot of work has gone on in a short period of time but I am very confident as I believe the Town Council are actually that things are going to be moving at pace now and we'll all be able to turn up and have a meeting there it would be nice sometime Thank you Yes, local member I'd just like to add a comment that we were at the Town Council on Tuesday 22nd November and they did receive this very favourably and they want to be fully engaged Thank you very much So Yes I'd just like to echo the remarks of my colleague Warren Green I think it's extremely important that something has happened after a long time of waiting we need to get this up and running because people of Norstow have been extremely patient and as you'll see in the report there's now 1,150 people in residence and we can't let this go on any longer we have to have proper facilities in Norstow Thank you Thank you Councillor Bygott it's good to hear from both local members Councillor Handie did you want to sum up at all? No, I think everything has been said that needs to be said Thank you Thank you Excuse me There'll be one fewer on the vote because Councillor Bittermack Donald has had to leave Thank you Are we happy to take this motion by affirmation? Thank you Anyone wishing to object or abstain? Lovely, therefore this council agrees the recommendation by affirmation Thank you So I call the meeting to a close Thank you members Please remember the date in your diary We look forward to seeing you in February