Tag: Cambs & Peterborough Combined Authority

  • Devolution process begins for Cambridgeshire

    The biggest shakeup of local government in a generation could mean the District/City boundary between Histon & Impington and Cambridge being removed, and South Cambridgeshire District Council, Cambridge City Council and Cambridgeshire County Council all being dissolved.

    Devolution

    A Government white paper published before Christmas revealed ambitious plans that would see a “transfer of power out of Westminster” to elected Mayors and other strategic authorities.

    As Cambridgeshire and Peterborough already have a democratically elected Mayor leading the Combined Authority, they will potentially be handed more responsibilities.

    The Government says the transition in Cambridgeshire should be complete by April 2028, and Jim McMahon, the Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution who is leading the re-structure, has now written to seven Cambridgeshire councils formally inviting them to work together and explore devolution options.

    They have until the middle of next month to come up with a framework for delivering all public services from fewer unitary authorities, rather than the current two-tier system of district and county councils.

    Ministers say this will deliver “simpler, more sustainable, local government structures” that will “increase value for money for council taxpayers”.

    For residents, once the devolution transition is complete it could end confusion about which Council is responsible for which services.

    Currently problems with bin collections, for example, must be reported to South Cambs District Council, while other services, such as roads, are among the County Council’s responsibilities.

    500,000 is the magic number

    The Government is recommending that each unitary authority should cover a population of around 500,000 “to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks”. But it has accepted there may be exceptions.

    A natural partnership would be between South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council, who already share services such as waste and planning. As one councillor explained, the shape of the geographic area covered would go “from being a ring donut to a jam-filled one”.

    South Cambridgeshire District Council headquarters. Photo: SCDC

    However, the population of the City and District Councils combined would only cover a population of 300,000 – nowhere close to the 500,000 recommendation.

    Other options, such as bringing neighbouring East Cambridgeshire District Council or Huntingdonshire District Council into the fold, are likely to be considered. But there is a chance these councils would feel better aligned with their other neighbours.

    Is now the right time?

    Speaking before councils received their invitation to start their devolution discussions, County Councillor Ros Hathorn questioned whether now the right time is to announce and “force through” the biggest changes in local government in 50 years. When she spoke to HI HUB, the County Council was in the throes of budget setting and had confirmed local elections will still be held in May.

    She said: “If I had a five year term like the Labour government do, the last thing I would do is essentially land a bomb in the whole of local government right now. This is what is happening here with devolution…

    “I appreciate there is a strong argument for forming unitary councils. But the way it is being done, the way it is being forced through, and the notion it is going to save lots of money I think will be demonstrated as being utterly naive.

    “There is no time to go out to public consultation and absolutely no time to do this democratically. If you want to do something like this properly, you do it by consultation and you do it with evidence. You don’t just allow council leaders and chief executives to handle something as important as this.”

    Councillor workload

    Another of Ros’s concern is that councillors could have a larger area to cover and would be representing more residents. She said: “There’s going to be fewer councillors and these individuals will be less connected to their areas as they’re going to have bigger patches to cover and greater responsibilities.

    “What people should be worried about is that in the unitary authority there’s going to be so much work that councillors are not going to be able to do other jobs. They’ll basically have to become full time councillors and there is a risk you will lose diversity among the people elected.”

    Martin Cahn, a South Cambridgeshire District Councillor representing H&I, commented he feels there are “so many unknowns” when it comes to the Government’s vision for devolution. Speaking at the same time as Ros, he said: “The Government is telling us this process is going to be voluntary, but there’s a feeling this is actually more ‘compulsory voluntary’.”

    He also pointed out that Cambridge City Council does not have any Parish Councils, and questioned whether some form of local authority will need to be created at this level of local government too: “If we have one unitary authority, should there be a Parish Council covering the city?

    “Will they want to reorganise the parishes around the edge where there are new developments? For example, Darwin Green, Trumpington, Eddington etc. – should there be some kind of co-ordination across these areas?”

    He added: “I see the logic in devolution, but how it will work is another matter…”

    Potential obstacles

    Cllr Bridget Smith, the leader of South Cambridgeshire District Council, outlined a potential predicament related to years of work on the Local Plan – the long-term strategy for future developments that all councils have to deliver and spend years working towards. 

    She told a select committee last month: “I have been working on a Local Plan jointly with Cambridge City Council for six years now and it has cost millions to get this far. If I unitarise [with the Cambridge City Council], our local [population] numbers would be somewhere over 300,000.

    “If I am forced to include another council to get me up to 500,000, I will have to throw that local plan in the bin and start all over again. That will have serious impacts on this Government’s aspirations for growth in one of the key areas for bio-med and knowledge intensive industries because there won’t be a Local Plan, and I will have to start all over again on a call for sites…

    “… So there are unforeseen or unintended consequences to some of this, which I really hope the Government is going to listen to.” While she accepted the Government wants to move forward with plans to reorganise local government, Cllr Smith said she wanted to fight for the cause of “smaller unitaries”. These, she feels, would “maintain connection to local places” which is important when considering new planning developments.

    Tight timeline

    The Government is already moving ahead with its devolution timeline. Neighbouring Norfolk County Council and Suffolk County Council are among the local authorities to have already agreed to join the Devolution Priority Programme.

    The Cambridgeshire councils have been given until March 21 to submit their interim plan or plans to the Government for review.  Following feedback, full proposals are to be submitted by November 28 of this year.

    While other local authorities have decided to postpone elections this May, Cambridgeshire County Council has confirmed theirs will still go ahead on May 1, 2025. Voters will also take to the polls on the same day for the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough mayoral election.

    Elections for the shadow authorities that are created are proposed to take place in Spring 2027, with the vesting day for new unitary councils a year later.

    Additional reporting by Hannah Brown at the Local Democracy Reporting Service

  • Council tax set to rise again

    All but one public organisation has proposed increasing their portion of the Council Tax for the upcoming financial year. If all of the amounts are approved, it means households in an average Band D property in Histon and Impington will have to pay £2,432 in 2025/26. The overall total is over £100 more than this year. 

    The current breakdown as it stands for 2025/26 is as follows: 

    • Cambridgeshire County Council: £1,700.64 (Proposed) 
    • South Cambridgeshire District Council: £175.40 (Proposed) 
    • Cambridgeshire Police and Crime Commissioner: £299.43 (Approved)
    • Cambridgeshire Fire Authority: £87.21 (Proposed)
    • Mayoral Combined Authority: £36 (Approved)
    • Parish Council Precept: £133.32 (Approved)

    County Council increase

    Cambridgeshire County Council has proposed increasing its proportion of the Council Tax payment by 4.99% – the maximum possible without a referendum being called. This includes its contribution towards Adult Social Care services. 

    The Council’s Strategy, Resources and Performance Committee heard at its last meeting how the demand for services, increasing complexity of need, inflation and market failures meant there is a £35.1 million gap in its 2025/26 finances. 

    However its proposed plans for the upcoming year include a £52 million investment in highways maintenance. The Council says this includes £14.5 million for the day-to-day management of roads and an additional £20m for planned maintenance including pavements, drainage, road safety measures and cycleways. 

    There are also proposals for £3 million funding to cover inflation for local care providers, an additional £9 million to support children who need to be looked after and £4.7 million for home to school transport services. 

    ‘…what choice do we have…?’ 

    New Sshire Hall – home of Cambridgeshire County Council. Photo: Hannah Brown, Local Democracy Reporter

    Cllr Lucy Nethsingha, Leader of Cambridgeshire County Council, said: “We didn’t want to put the council tax up, but what choice do we have when we’re facing a challenging budget. This reflects the position faced by councils up and down the country, and we’ve seen the national profile on key services such as special educational needs and disability services. This the same in Cambridgeshire. 

    “Between 2020 and 2024, there was a 70% increase in children with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), cost increases in home to school transport and in autism services over the same period. We do not receive the funding from Government to meet the needs of the growing population in Cambridgeshire, so we must do what we can to deliver value for money in the services we provide, whilst investing in what matters most to our residents.”

    The final decision on the increase will be made when the Full Council meets on 11 February. 

    4.9% increase for police

    Residents’ contribution towards policing will also increase by 4.9%, which was unanimously supported by the police and crime panel yesterday (Wednesday). This means residents in a Band D property will pay around £14 more in the next financial year for police officers, bringing this annual contribution to just under £300. 

    When first proposing the increase, Cambridgeshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner Darryl Preston explained how the county falls short because of Central Government’s current funding model. 

    He said: “Police funding is based on a woefully inadequate funding formula which results in our county remaining one of the lowest funded forces in the country. Since the funding formula was set, our population has grown by 11% and is forecast to grow much faster than the national average. 

    “At the same time, there are areas of the country which have maintained the same level of population and some areas who have seen their population reduce. Yet the way funding is allocated using the existing formula is outdated and does not meet our county’s needs.”

    Cambridgeshire Fire and Rescue Service is proposing to increase its precept by just under £5 to £87.21. This will be debated next Thursday (13 February). Chief Fire Officer Matthew Warren said a long-term partnership which involved sharing resources with the Suffolk service is coming to an end. To break even, he said Cambridgeshire now has to find an additional £1 million. 

    Increased demand vs decreased funding

    South Cambridgeshire District Council headquarters. Photo: SCDC

    Both South Cambridgeshire District Council and Histon & Impington Parish Council’s increases work out to be around 3%. For a Band D property, the District Council will make a final decision at the end of the month on proposals to increase its precept by £5.09 to £175.40. South Cambs argues it is expected to maintain its position to be among the lowest 25% of district councils in the country when it comes to its Council Tax charge. 

    South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Lead Cabinet Member for Resources, Cllr John Williams, said: “It continues to be challenging for councils due to increasing demand for our services coupled with reduced funding. 

    “So, it’s a fantastic achievement for residents that we’re a financially sound Council – but important to remember we only retain a very small amount of the Council Tax we collect. Most of it gets passed on to other authorities – and we continue to do all we can to make the most of every pound we do receive.”

    Histon & Impington Parish Council has voted in favour of increasing its Council Tax precept to £133.32. Meanwhile, the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority is the only public body covering the village to freeze its contribution to £36. However, last year it tripled the amount and says separate funding for public transport has helped its finances. 

    READ MORE: Mayor advised to go ahead with bus franchising

  • Mayor advised to go ahead with bus franchising

    Changes to how the bus network is managed have moved forward another step.

    Bus franchising across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough has been recommended to Mayor Dr Nik Johnson now the findings of a public consultation have been reviewed. 

    Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) transport committee met last Friday (January 24) to discuss the analysis from the consultation, which concluded in November last year. Over 1,600 stakeholders responded, including councils, bus companies, community groups and bus users. 

    The consultation proposed two potential approaches for running the bus network: an enhanced partnership model and, a more favoured model of franchising. The committee unanimously voted to recommend that the Mayor chooses franchising as the best way to reform the region’s bus network. He is due to make a final decision early next month.

    Judith Barker, executive director of place and connectivity at CPCA, told the meeting: “We had to look at each case and all the representations and concluded that, to deliver the strategic objectives and to deliver value for money within the funding envelope, the best way forward was to recommend franchising.”

    Current system

    Currently, our bus services are mainly run by private operators which have control over the routes, timetables, ticket options, fares and frequency of buses. 

    Dr Nik Johnson, the Mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.

    Under the proposed franchising model, the CPCA would gain control over these areas and private operators would no longer be able to independently decide to withdraw services. 

    Instead, operators would bid to run services under franchise contracts, with the CPCA overseeing the process and monitoring operations based on travel needs rather than profits. It also means an integrated ticketing can be introduced, where the same ticket can be used across the network.

    A report put before the CPCA’s transport committee meeting revealed that 1,468 participants in the consultation provided an answer to whether they supported or opposed the bus franchising proposals.

    A total of 42 per cent of responses strongly supported franchising, with a further 21 per cent tending to support, putting 63 per cent of participants in favour of the new model.

    The report revealed that 18 per cent of responses neither supported nor opposed, while seven percent tended to oppose and a further seven percent strongly opposed.

    Rural services ‘woefully inadequate’

    South Cambridgeshire District Council responded to the consultation, saying “in principle” it supports the proposed franchising scheme. 

    The Council said it “wants the franchising decision to drive economic growth in new settlements” but also consider current transport needs and economic growth objectives. It particularly highlighted that “a key consideration” should be getting children and students to places of education and training. 

    The Busway. Photo: Guy Richardson

    It also shared firm words about the current situation with the consultation, saying: “The Council expects to see better bus services within South Cambridgeshire, and improved connections with other destinations such as Cambridge. 

    “Buses should be affordable and reliable. This is especially important for those most reliant on public transport. As a rural district, our residents have long suffered woefully inadequate bus services, and we expect these to improve significantly under a franchising arrangement.” 

    South Cambs added it “expects the CPCA to ensure it has the funding, capacity and capability to manage the transition and service” and is “keen to see” a transition to a net zero fleet and accessibility prioritised. 

    Councillor Peter McDonald, South Cambridgeshire District Council’s lead cabinet member for economic development, described the franchising scheme as “an opportunity for step change” at Friday’s CPCA committee meeting

    He told officers: “We fully support the work that has been done… but please keep rural connectivity in mind, especially for those areas where there isn’t a rail connection. Then, the whole principle of franchising and having to control that bus network is increasingly important.” 

    Further discussions

    Bus franchising will be discussed in detail at further meetings before the Mayor makes a final decision. According to a Combined Authority report, the total operational costs for franchising would be £9.65 million.

    The franchising option would require the Combined Authority to acquire bus depots. The capital costs of depots in the outline business case is £31 million, funded by £5 million non-ringfenced capital grant, £4 million ringfenced capital and £22 million borrowing.

    Reporting by Joe Griffin, Local Democracy Reporting Service. Additional words from HI HUB.

    READ MORE: Businesses Against Abuse – offering a safe place for those in need

  • Council u-turns on green grant scheme following HI HUB investigation

    Council u-turns on green grant scheme following HI HUB investigation

    South Cambridgeshire District Council (SCDC) have admitted that they wrongly excluded Histon & Impington and six other South Cambs villages from a funding scheme to support Net Zero initiatives across the District.

    Data error

    When the Net Zero Villages Grant scheme was announced in December 2024, Histon & Impington was deemed ineligible to apply, on the grounds that the village was defined by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) as part of the Cambridge Built-up Area.

    But HI HUB enquires with the ONS as to why that definition was applied revealed that Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority – who set the rules for the scheme – had based it on out-of-date information, rather than the 2021 census.

    An ONS spokesperson told HI HUB: “It appears that the data… is from the 2011 Built Up Area (BUA) geography. Looking at both the 2022 and the 2024 version of the BUA classification, the village of Histon and Impington is a separate BUA. Please see the most recent version of the BUA classification which can be found here.”

    Extended deadline

    SCDC is responsible for managing the grant scheme for the Combined Authority. HI HUB challenged them with the ONS response, and this has resulted in Histon & Impington, Milton, Girton, Great and Little Shelford, Fen Ditton, Fulbourn and Teversham all being eligible to apply for the Net Zero Villages Grant – but not Orchard Park.

    To correct the record, SCDC is now contacting these communities to invite them to apply for the grant.

    Community groups, businesses and the Histon & Impington Parish council are now all able to submit applications for grants ranging from £20,000 to £100,000 to support “transformative, community-led projects” and help villages become low carbon, more sustainable and more resilient to the effects of climate change.

    SCDC is also extending the window for applications until 2 February 2025.

    They say: “To confirm a project’s eligibility, applicants should open the map, select Cambridge in the ‘Settlements’ table and confirm the community asset or project site is outside of the yellow shaded area. This area represents the Cambridge built-up area, as classified by the ONS using the 2021 Census figures.

    “Potential applicants should email climateandenvironment@scambs.gov.uk to have any questions answered, or to arrange a time to discuss their application 1-2-1 with an officer.”  

    READ ALSO: Green grant opportunity denied to villages near Cambridge