The Executive Leader and Deputy Executive Leader, Councillors J A Ablewhite and N J Guyatt respectively to open the debate after a presentation on the State of the District 2013.
Minutes:
The Chairman reminded Members of the decision by the Council to suspend Council Procedure Rule 11 (Rules of Debate) to enable headline debates and ‘Green Paper’ proposals to be discussed by Members in an open manner. The Council, therefore,
RESOLVED
that Council Procedure Rule 11 (Rules of Debate) be suspended for the duration of the discussion under Minute No 30 during which time the common law rules of debate be observed by Members and applied by the Chairman.
The Chairman invited the Executive Leader and Deputy Executive Leader, Councillors J D Ablewhite and N J Guyatt respectively to address the Council on the State of the District 2013 and to open the debate which was scheduled to follow. A copy of the address delivered by the Executive Leader is appended in the Minute Book.
Councillor Guyatt then drew Members’ attention to the other major challenges faced by the Council in terms of planning for housing and economic growth if the District was to remain prosperous and a good place to live and work. He referred to the growing population, the job opportunities available in Huntingdonshire and Cambridge and the need to provide places to live for families and young people such that they may continue to live close to their workplace and family home. He was, however, mindful of the need to balance housing growth with the impact on the environment and impressed upon the Council the importance of the new Local Plan and proposed site allocation exercise so that it was clearly the Local Planning Authority and not the Planning Inspectorate who would decide where growth would occur. Councillor Guyatt acknowledged that housing growth would require additional investment in local infrastructure and he reported that a transport plan for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough was currently in preparation to identify where new transport links and other infrastructure provision was required. He expressed confidence that, ultimately, the infrastructure improvement required across the County would be provided but suggested that this could occur over several years.
Councillor R J West opened the Council debate by referring to transport provision and by questioning the contribution made by bus companies to the growth agenda locally. In his view, the bus companies had not appeared to be proactive in meeting the needs of customers as for example in scheduling services to meet train arrival/departure times. In response, Councillor Guyatt was of the view that the bus companies had a major role to play in providing transport locally in the future and, subject to the determination of the application for development at Alconbury Weald, referred to proposals to extend both the guided bus and rail into the development. However, Councillor Guyatt confirmed that, at some stage, consideration would need to be given to alternative forms of transport given the increasing scarcity of fuel.
Whilst welcoming the new development in Huntingdon town centre, Councillor P Kadewere referred to deprivation in Huntingdon North Ward and asked the Executive Leader what steps the Council would take to assist businesses in that part of the town. The Executive Leader assured the questioner that the District Council would continue to work closely with strategic partners to support the most vulnerable in the District. Helping people move away from deprivation was not a role for the District Council alone but the authority, with partners, could provide opportunities and choices for those in such circumstances to change their lives. In terms of the closure of shops and businesses, Councillor Ablewhite commented on the impact of e–commerce but was confident that the redevelopment of Huntingdon town centre would encourage increased visitors to the town and that added footfall would generate greater opportunities for existing businesses and services to revitalise what could be offered on the traditional High Street in Huntingdon.
Councillor Mrs M Banerjee contended that the Council’s policies should seek to create opportunities for elderly people to downsize to smaller properties within rural villages or should give greater encouragement to developers to build residential homes for retired people. In response, Councillor Guyatt stated that opportunities existed for such development to take place but that proposals of this nature did not arise very often, plus in many instances, retired persons were reluctant to move.
In response to a question from Councillor S M Van De Kerkhove regarding infrastructure provision and the suggestion that developers neglected to deliver the facilities which many have been promised under original planning consents, Councillor Guyatt urged Members to encourage residents to lobby developers rigorously to adhere to their agreed undertakings. He added, however, that the District Council had little authority in this respect.
In commenting on the quality of life in Huntingdonshire and commending the contribution made to this by the District Council’s services and initiatives, Councillor M G Baker asked whether it would be possible to support the construction of a flood alleviation scheme for Alconbury and Alconbury Weston in the same way as that currently being installed in Godmanchester. Councillor Baker also commended the excellent contribution made by the Council’s Fraud Team and his fear that the County Council’s Social Care budget ultimately would strongly impact on public sector finances as a whole. In reply, the Executive Leader thanked Councillor Baker for his complimentary remarks, explained that the flood alleviation works at Godmanchester whilst delivered by the Environment Agency and the County Council would not have progressed without a contribution from the District Council and that the District Council would respond when appropriate to proposals for tolling of the A14.
Councillor M F Shellens referred to the increase in distance covered by those living in rural areas when travelling to work and questioned whether the District Council could consider policies which would encourage development of employment in rural areas. Using proposed development at RAF Upwood as his example, the Executive Leader concurred with the comments of the questioner and explained how he would wish to see a mixed use sustainable development on the site at RAF Upwood rather than just housing. He added that the Local Government Association had recently discussed the provision of bus services in rural areas to increase the opportunity for access to employment.
In response to comments made by Councillor P D Reeve, the Executive Leader confirmed that the Cabinet had recommended that further council tax support not be granted to Town and Parish Councils in 2014/2015 and subsequent years and that it would not be in the best interests of the District to establish a greater Cambridgeshire and Peterborough authority as a way to generate additional savings as, in his view, the step would be detrimental to local residents. Councillor Ablewhite added that he could not support development in the countryside in response to the suggestion that the District Council should seek to secure other revenue streams by building hotels, social and affordable housing.
Councillor D B Dew concluded the debate by urging Member representatives of other tiers of authority to join together to support proposed infrastructure projects for the benefit of the County as a whole. This sentiment was endorsed by the Executive Leader.
Actions:60 minutes