Issue - meetings

To receive a report on the potential introduction of congestion charging by the Greater Cambridge Partnership.

Executive Councillor: J Neish.

The Cabinet has endorsed the concerns raised in the report on behalf of Huntingdonshire residents and businesses and submitted a formal response to the Greater Cambridge Partnership as outlined in Appendix 2.

Consideration was given to a report by the Strategic Growth Manager (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) drawing Members’ attention to the potential introduction of congestion charging by the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP).

In introducing the report, the Executive Councillor for Strategic Planning acquainted the Cabinet with the background to the proposals reminding Members of the GCP’s efforts to promote significantly enhanced bus services around Greater Cambridge, which extended into Huntingdonshire along with walking and cycling infrastructure enhancements with the aim of reducing congestion and resultant carbon dioxide emissions and air pollution within Cambridge. He then went on to report the implication of the proposals upon Huntingdonshire’s residents; namely, the lack of easy access to proposed transport alternatives and the impact upon businesses needing to make quick and frequent trips into Cambridge. The Cabinet’s attention was then drawn to Appendix 2 which outlined the content of a letter formally responding to the proposals.

Cabinet Members expressed their support for the content of Appendix 2 and acknowledged the impact of the proposals upon residents in rural localities within the District which did not have regular or frequent bus services and/or alternative reliable options to the private car. Concerns were expressed that the proposals appeared to target the working population at a time when the cost of living was already increasing. The Cabinet concurred that they wished to see an improvement in public transport and better services but that the proposals for raising the required funding to deliver this aim targeted motorists and was not appropriate for Huntingdonshire’s residents. Furthermore, the impact upon the wider population had not been fully considered. The example referred to at the meeting was a patient receiving treatment at Addenbrooke’s Hospital for a terminally ill disease who may not wish to use public transport options.

Having been acquainted with the views of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel (Performance & Growth), the Cabinet

RESOLVED

to endorse the concerns raised in the report on behalf of Huntingdonshire residents and businesses and agreed to submit a formal response to the Greater Cambridge Partnership as outlined in Appendix 2 (of the report now submitted).

(Owing to his remote attendance via Zoom, Councillor J Neish did not vote on this item).

The Proposed Cambridge Congestion Charge report is to be presented to the Panel.

By means of a report by the Strategic Growth Manager (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book), the Proposed Cambridge Congestion Charge was presented to the Panel.

Councillor Dew expressed concerns over the proposal due to the area of authority of the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) and that were this to be presented as part of a bigger package from a County wide authority it would be easier to express support.

Following a question from Councillor Roberts, who agreed with Councillor Dew’s comments, it was confirmed that the Council did not have prior knowledge of these proposals. Further to this, Councillor Roberts felt that a stronger tone should be expressed in the proposed response to GCP in order to establish clarity in how this would affect the district and its residents.

Councillor Morris agreed with the previous comments but felt that the letter could be more balanced, with the two following inclusions:

·  If a charge was to be introduced, public transport improvements would need to be made first so that people had an attractive alternative to driving. 

·  Emissions in Huntingdonshire would also be reduced, thus improving health by encouraging active travel, and bringing about improvements to the public transport network in the district.

The Panel agreed that these were sensible points and although already covered by the proposed letter could add clarity and were noted.

In response to Councillor Wakeford, who queried the purpose of sending the letter at this time, the Panel heard that by sending the letter the voice of Huntingdonshire would be heard and future dialogue and engagement would be encouraged for the future.

Councillor Wakeford further queried the content of the letter as it was felt that these were points that the GCP should already be aware of. The Panel were assured that by sending the letter, the Council would be ensuring that the GCP are aware of the issues facing Huntingdonshire residents and that the Council be consulted as the project progresses.

Following concerns from the Panel over the authority of the GCP and the geographical reach of the partnerships authority, the Panel heard that constitutionally the GCP do not have authority in the district and that the proposed letter looks to seek clarity on this point.

Although there was wide support from the Panel on the theme of active travel within the district, doubts and concerns were expressed that this was something which the GCP could deliver.

Having welcomed the report, the Panel thereupon

RESOLVED

that the Cabinet be encouraged to endorse the recommendations contained within the report.