The following planning applications in the Sutton division have been published by East Cambridgeshire District Council.

20/00091/FUL
Little Downham
1A Townsend Little Downham CB6 2TA
Single-storey rear extension and outbuilding.

20/00101/FUL
Little Downham
Land East Of 21A Cannon Street Little Downham
Construction of one four-bedroom, two-storey detached dwelling with single garage and associated works.

20/00154/FUL
Little Downham
Barnhouse Holme Lane Little Downham
Single-storey side extension, internal and external alterations, garage conversion and extension above existing store.

20/00130/FUL
Sutton
162 High Street Sutton CB6 2NR
Demolition of existing single-storey side extension garage and shed and constructing a new two-storey attached dwelling with associated parking.

Further information can be found on the district council’s planning pages. If you would like to respond formally to the council about any planning application, comments should be addressed to the district council and not to me.  Comments may be made

• online using the council’s public access web page (the link above);
• by email to plservices@eastcambs.gov.uk;
• or by post to the Planning Department, The Grange, Nutholt Lane, Ely, CB7 4EE.

Healthwatch Cambridgeshire recently brought together a representative panel of thirty members of the public from across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough to give their views on local healthcare funding.

The panel debated two key issues:

• availability of over the counter medicines on prescription
• emergency and urgent care.

Over the counter medicines

Cambridgeshire & Peterborough’s NHS Clinical Commissioning Group spent £117 million on prescriptions in 2018. This included £5.3 million for medicines that people could have bought over the counter.

Panellists wanted to see people take personal responsibility for their health. But they felt there was a need for better education and information to help people do this. They also wanted a safety net in place for vulnerable people so they didn’t go without medication if they couldn’t afford to pay for it.

Urgent and emergency care

The second panel considered whether people should be redirected to other NHS services if they arrive at A&E but do not need emergency treatment. The panellists:

• wanted those most in need in A&E to be seen first
• supported redirecting people who did not need emergency services
• wanted better information and signposting for people about the options available.

More information about these panels is available on the Healthwatch website here.

I have this evening sent the following letter to my colleagues and friends in the Liberal Democrat group on Cambridgeshire County Council.

“Dear Colleagues,

Nearly nine months ago, to my absolute delight, Cllr Lucy Nethsingha was elected to the European Parliament. At that time, no-one knew how long Britain was to remain a member of the European Union. Despite this uncertainty, Lucy resigned as leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Cambridgeshire County Council in order to concentrate on her work in Brussels, and I put my name forward as her temporary replacement, to hold the fort in her absence.

I had hoped—and I know Lucy will take this in totally the right way—that her time in Brussels would be a long one, both for her sake and for the sake of our country. Sadly, that was not to be, and Lucy’s role as an MEP ends tonight. I want to thank Lucy enormously for her hard work on our behalf as one of our elected politicians in the European Parliament. Britain will be the poorer without politicians of Lucy’s calibre representing us at a European level.

It has never been my intention to supplant Lucy as leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Cambridgeshire County Council. I am not driven by any personal ambition, though I am deeply ambitious for my community, my county, my country, and therefore my party.

I am therefore submitting my resignation as leader of the Liberal Democrat group, in order to enable a leadership election to take place on Friday 7 February.

Cllr David Jenkins, who has served so ably as my deputy leader, will continue to hold that post to provide continuity. I have greatly enjoyed working with David as the Liberal Democrat group leadership team on Cambridgeshire County Council, and am hugely grateful to him for his support, encouragement and guidance.

Finally, thank you all for the opportunity you have given me, of serving as your group leader for the last nine months. It has been an honour and a privilege, and I have thoroughly enjoyed working with you all in that capacity.

With all good wishes,

Lorna”

A reminder for those driving into Cambridge along Histon Road, that works to the junction of Histon Road with Victoria Road and Huntingdon Road start in earnest on Monday (3 February).

There will be temporary traffic lights at the junction between 9:30AM and 3:30PM Monday to Friday. Outside of these hours, all the lights at the junction will work as usual. The junction works are set to take 18 weeks.

This is part of a major scheme along the whole of Histon Road from the A14 to the top of Castle Street, which will last around 15 months in total.

The Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority Board meets in Ely today. They recently decided to meet every two months rather than monthly. Today’s agenda has 31 items and is 780 pages long.

I’m here to ask the questions the Combined Authority’s Overview & Scrutiny Committee agreed on Monday that I should ask on their behalf. There are eight public questions first, all on the Local Transport Plan. The consultation on the draft Plan took place at the end of last year, and the report to the Board today outlines the responses, along with suggestions for changes to the Plan in response. Questioners are particularly interested in the Huntingdon Third River Crossing.

The agenda includes setting the Combined Authority’s budget and agreeing its business plan. The Board also discusses the business case for “£100,000 homes”, public consultation on the CAM metro proposed tunneled section under Cambridge, and the next stage of the proposals for the regional ‘arms’ of the network. The Overview & Scrutiny Committee has asked about progress on identifying funding for this multi-billion pound project, and I’m told it’s expected to come from a number of sources.

The motion banning the Combined Authority from holding any meetings whatsoever in Cambridge, which the Overview & Scrutiny Committee unanimously disapproved, has been amended so that it allows for meetings hosted by the city council at the Guildhall, but not meetings hosted by the county council at Shire Hall. It’s all a bit academic anyway, as the county council will be moving out of Shire Hall to Alconbury soon, but it makes a very poor motion slightly less ridiculous.

The meeting comes to an end after four hours, and I’m very late indeed heading down the M11 and on to Hertfordshire to see my son and grandson.

Tonight there’s a short meeting just before the meeting of Sutton Parish Council, for residents in Mepal Road, Tower Road and some homes in The Orchards and Millfield to raise with representatives of Linden Homes their concerns about the current works on Phase One of the new development at the top of Mepal Road.

A number of issues are raised, and Linden Homes promises to take these away and deal with them. These include:

1. Lack of response from Linden Homes to contact from residents.
2. Delays to the drain repairs—work will now begin on 10 February rather than in January.
3. Mud left on the road—Linden Homes will check wheel washing and road sweeping arrangements.
4. Concerns about increases in soil levels and building heights.
5. The stretch of grass that interrupts the footway.
6. The volume and speed of traffic on Mepal Road.
7. Work starting on site before 8:00AM.

The County Council’s General Purposes Committee today takes only an hour and a half to whip through its agenda, which catches the council officers presenting reports on the hop – they’ve obviously assumed we’ll take a lot longer and haven’t turned up for their slots yet, so colleagues are calling them to tell them they’re on and they’re racing in out of breath and skidding into the ‘report presenter’ chair.

The budget papers don’t get discussed at all: it’s a pretend budget (the Conservative administration will reveal its real budget next week, which it will propose as an amendment to the pretend budget we’re seeing today) so there’s no point having a pretend debate about it.

We are asked for money for staff to do financial assessments with adults receiving social care, after the Adults Committee recently agreed new and increased charges for many care recipients. We’re also asked to authorise spending on the council’s IT partly as a result of the move to Alconbury and also as part of the sharing of IT services between Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.

There’s also a proposal to spend money to try to reduce the number of Education Health & Care Plans (EHCPs) for children with special educational needs and disabilities. The assumption is that because there are more EHCPs being issued in affluent areas, this must mean that these children are receiving more council resources and support than they need. The proposal is to analyse the demand, identify ways to reduce it, and try them out. These will include using ‘behavioural science techniques’ to influence demand. I’m profoundly uneasy about some of these assumptions, and abstain on the vote.

A proposal for trialling car free zones outside a couple of schools only proposes to do so in Cambridge. I ask for consideration to be given to including a trial in a rural area as soon as possible.

Monday morning and it’s the monthly meeting of the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

At least 10 out of the 14 of us have to be present for any business to be transacted, so with people’s tendency to be unwell or have other meetings that’s always a bit of a nail-biter. The rule is set in Government regulations, so we agree that I should write as Chair to the Combined Authority’s Chief Executive to explain why it’s a problem in the hope that the message will trickle upwards.

We agree to ask a number of questions at the Combined Authority Board meeting on Wednesday morning, including why a Chair of the Combined Authority’s Climate Change Commission hasn’t yet been announced after two months.

The Board on Wednesday will be asked to consider a motion from the leaders of Fenland and East Cambridgeshire councils which would ban the Combined Authority from holding any meetings whatsoever in Cambridge. The reason given for this proposal is traffic congestion and air quality in Cambridge, but the motion doesn’t even mention public transport which is a pretty extraordinary omission in the circumstances. Absolutely everyone on the committee thinks it’s a poor motion with no evidence to support it, and we agree to ask how it can be justified.

Substituting for an absent colleague this morning at a meeting of the county council’s Highways & Infrastructure Committee.

I raise a question about movable speed limit signs: the council has moved towards bulk purchasing of these to reduce the cost for parish councils which apply for them. However, at the recent panel I attended to discuss parish councils’ highways applications, it was very clear that there was a huge variation in the price and specification of the mobile speed signs being applied for. It has to be one or the other – either a rather Soviet-style ‘one size fits all’ approach with the benefits of reduced cost, or flexibility to meet parishes’ individual needs in which case bulk purchasing won’t help. More work to be done on this, I think.

Then there’s a petition about making it easier to close streets temporarily for children to play out, which I speak in support of. Currently there’s a huge bureaucratic barrier to communities in Cambridgeshire seeking to close their streets for play, which might explain where there are no Playing Out streets in the county. We all agree there’s something here to be further investigated.

Next we have four questions. The first is asking for motorcycles to be allowed to use bus lanes: my colleague Cllr Ian Manning wants to know more about whether this would encourage people out of their cars and on to motorcycles (the only scenario in which this would be better for the environment), and also what the comparative carbon emissions would be.

The second and third questions are about the barriers recently installed by a private company on the guided busway pathway near the biomedical campus. Cllr Manning suggests we need a comprehensive statement from council officers on the county council’s responsibility and position, so that there is some consistency of approach. There’s also a suggestion that consultation processes need to be reviewed; and about whether a wider safety review is needed.

The fourth question is about progress on introducing coach parking permits along The Backs in Cambridge. The questioner mentions seeing thirty-two coaches arriving to park in an already fully parked-up area – and also the climate impact.

We then receive a financial update for the directorate of which Highways is a part. There’s an underspend projected of £2.7M for this year, mostly due to greater than expected income for bus lane and parking enforcement, and a reduction in landfill tax due to breakdowns at the Waterbeach waste plant. Various questions follow on issues such as concessionary fares and delays to works. I ask a number of questions:

1. What is happening about the £463K increase in the costs of winter gritting under the new contract with Skanska, and how can this be addressed? (Officers advise that there is an audit currently in progress of the last two years of the contract).
2. One of my parishes has suggested that the new e-permit scheme for large vans and trailers at the recycling centres may be leading to an increase in fly-tipping – how does the county council liaise about this with district councils who pick up the bill for clearing fly-tipping? (I’m advised that there is ongoing dialogue, but nothing yet to suggest that this is an issue).
3. The report on tree removal and tree planting shows 110 trees removed and 159 planted in the last three years. I’m told these numbers relate only to trees planted on the highway. I ask whether it’s possible to get numbers for trees planted by the county council across Cambridgeshire in total, as tree planting is a significant part of the action we’re committed to in addressing climate change and carbon emissions.

The highways risk register passes with minimal comment.

Next there’s a report on residents’ parking permits in Cambridge. The recommendation is to leave the fees for residents’ and visitors’ permits unchanged, but to reduce the number of permits available to tradespeople from two to one. The reason for the proposal is that although only one of the two permits should be in use at any one time, in some cases this is being breached. Cllr Manning says that reducing the number of permits for all tradespeople because a few break the rules is unfair, and proposes instead that in cases where a tradeperson is using both permits at once, both should be ruled invalid. It’s agreed that this clearly needs more work, and that proposals for the tradespeople’s permit should be brought back to the committee in a few months’ time.

We receive the plan for future meetings. I’m advised that comments on the process for applications by parish councils for local highways schemes will be on the agenda for a future meeting. Then suddenly a lively discussion breaks out about the controversial new anti-terrorism barriers outside King’s College Cambridge. Meeting over at 12:45PM.

Another update from the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Against Scams Partnership. This time it’s about courier fraud, also known as impersonation fraud.

Courier fraud is when criminals cold call a victim, typically claiming to be a police officer or bank official. Offences are often committed by organised crime groups who target the elderly and vulnerable.

Fraudsters may claim there is an issue with the victim’s bank account or request their assistance with an ongoing bank or police investigation – the ultimate aim of the call being to lure them into handing over money or their bank details. The fraudsters may tell the victim to withdraw large sums of cash, purchase an expensive item, or provide their bank cards or details. In all cases, a ‘courier’ will then come and pick up the cash or items, on behalf of the police or bank. You’ll never see them, or your cash, again!

See this excellent YouTube video produced by the Metropolitan Police which shows how courier fraud and other impersonation frauds work.

There is also a recent article in the BBC News which gives a victim account of the devastation caused by courier fraud.

Instances of courier fraud across the country are on the rise and affecting some of the most vulnerable people in our communities.

There were 233 reports of courier fraud in the East of England in 2019 (up until 24 December) with total losses of more than £620,000.

Remember:

1. Your bank or the police will never call you to ask you to verify your personal details or PIN by phone or offer to pick up your card by courier. They will never ask for your bank account details or PIN over the phone, or ask you to send them your bank cards or any other personal property. Hang up if you get a call like this.
2. If you need to call your bank back to check, wait five minutes as fraudsters may stay on the line after you hang up. Alternatively, use a different line altogether to call your bank.
3. Your debit or credit card is yours – don’t let a stranger take it off you. You should only ever have to hand it over at your bank. If it’s cancelled, you should destroy it yourself.
4. If you are suspicious about a telephone conversation you should end the call and contact police via the non-emergency number, 101. Ideally use a mobile phone or a friend’s phone or wait at least five minutes before calling to ensure you aren’t reconnected to the offender.
5. To report an incident in action or if you are in immediate danger always call 999.