District councillor for Sutton, Mepal, Witcham, and Wentworth (East Cambridgeshire District Council) and county councillor for Coveney, Little Downham, Mepal, Pymoor, Sutton, Wardy Hill, Way Head, Witcham, and Witchford (Cambridgeshire County Council)
East Cambridgeshire District Council has published the following related planning application in the Sutton division.
22/01186/FUL Sutton The Bungalow 1 Fieldgate Sutton Single storey rear extension, re- roof side extension, new porch canopy, internal and external alterations and new driveway/ access, alterations to existing outbuilding.
You can find further information on the district council’s planning pages. If you would like to respond formally to the council about any planning application, please write to the district council and not to me. You can comment
online using the council’s public access web page (the link above);
A reminder that East Cambridgeshire District Council is consulting residents on the installation of CCTV in taxis and private hire vehicles.
The Government’s Department for Transport published new Statutory Taxi and Private Hire Vehicle Standards in July 2020. It says:
“All licensing authorities should consult to identify if there are local circumstances which indicate that the installation of CCTV in vehicles would have either a positive or an adverse net effect on the safety of taxi and private hire vehicle users, including children or vulnerable adults, and taking into account potential privacy issues.”
The Government expects its recommendations to be implemented by licensing authorities, such as East Cambridgeshire District Council, unless there is a compelling local reason not to.
The Council is inviting members of the trade, the public, and stakeholders to comment on the proposals, by 3:00PM on Monday 13 March 2023.
East Cambridgeshire District Council has published the following related planning applications in the Sutton division.
22/01060/FUL Little Downham Land adjacent 2A Black Bank Road Little Downham Proposed tractor store (revised scheme of previously approved 21/01035/FUL).
22/01365/FUL Little Downham Land north east of 11 Black Bank Road Little Downham Siting and use of five container units as office and associated works (retrospective).
22/0106/FUL Little Downham 8 Bury Green Little Downham CB6 2UH Proposed two storey rear extension, garage conversion, double garage to front and internal alterations.
22/01441/FUL Little Downham Unit 1 Black Bank Road Little Downham Building for sake brewery (retrospective).
22/01472/AGN Little Downham Mount Pleasant Farm 66-68 Main Street Pymoor Agricultural store building for farm equipment and implements.
22/01310/FUL Little Downham Black Bank Business Centre Black Bank Road Little Downham Change of use of land to commercial self-storage including siting and use of self-storage containers; siting and use of mobile structures associated with existing Business Centre activities; associated works. Proposed landscaping works (retrospective).
22/01453/FUL Little Downham 6 Second Drove Little Downham CB6 2UD Construction of first floor extension above existing flat roof extension, addition of 2 pitched dormers on front elevation and internal alterations to layout.
22/01421/AGN Little Downham CN Seeds Ltd 18 Main Street Pymoor Agricultural produce /machinery store.
22/01418/FUL Mepal 16A Bridge Road Mepal CB6 2AR Proposed first floor side extension, porch and partial over-cladding of existing brick walls at first floor level.
22/01138/FUL Sutton 32 The Brook Sutton CB6 2QQ Loft conversion.
22/01351/FUL Wentworth The White House Church Road Wentworth CB6 3QE New garden brick wall (boundary wall).
22/01408/FUL Witchford 28 Manor Close Witchford CB6 2JB New access, involving lowered kerb, vehicle hardstanding and fencing.
You can find further information on the district council’s planning pages. If you would like to respond formally to the council about any planning application, please write to the district council and not to me. You can comment
online using the council’s public access web page (the link above);
Earlier this week the Government issued its ‘provisional local government finance settlement’—the pre-Christmas indication to councils of the money they will have available for local services next year.
The Government proposes that Cambridgeshire County Council’s ‘core spending power’ (the overall revenue funding available for council services) should increase by 9.5 per cent. Unfortunately however …
That’s less than the current rate of inflation, so overall it will buy less.
Half of the 9.5 per cent is from the council’s power to raise council tax—in other words, the Government expects local tax payers to shoulder a lot of the extra costs.
Some of the remainder replaces lost business rates income.
London ambulance—image by MANHATTAN RESEARCH INC and licensed under CC-BY-2.0
Dear Mr Barclay, on 20 December you accused hardworking and dedicated paramedics of making ‘a conscious choice to inflict harm on patients’.
Every decent person I know has recoiled in disgust at your comments.
Harm is being daily inflicted on patients by your government, Mr Barclay—even on days when there are no strikes. The 93-year-old woman left screaming in pain with a broken hip on a care home floor for twenty-five hours before being taken to hospital. The 83-year-old woman, again with a broken hip, who had to wait fourteen hours before an ambulance was able to collect her, and a further twenty-six hours in a queue of ambulances before she could be taken inside the hospital building. The 73-year-old man whose family had to drive him to hospital after being told he would have to wait nine hours for an ambulance—a decision which probably saved his life.
None of that is down to striking paramedics, Mr Barclay. It’s all down to you.
You and your leader, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, have refused to negotiate over NHS pay, claiming that the pay rises NHS workers are seeking are unaffordable. It’s a word a lot of public sector workers are using, Mr Barclay—about their rent, their mortgage, their gas bill, their grocery shopping. Your government is presiding over ruinous increases of the basic costs of living. Nurses shouldn’t need to be relying on food banks.
And please don’t try to gaslight us about it being the same the world over, Mr Barclay. It’s not.
Conservative MP Jake Berry recently said that staff struggling with the cost of living should just go and get a better paid job. If that is the Conservative Party’s advice to nurses, paramedics, and other essential health workers unable to get by on what they earn in the public sector, the already desperate shortage of NHS staff would become even more catastrophic.
That really would be a conscious choice to inflict harm on patients, Mr Barclay.
Cambridgeshire Fire and Rescue Service is looking for local residents and business owners to get involved in a new online feedback forum to share their views and opinions about the work of their local fire and rescue service.
If this is something you think might interest you, do read more here.
And anyone who signs up before Monday 19 December will be entered into a free prize draw to win a £50 gift voucher.
East Cambridgeshire District Council has published the following related planning applications in the Sutton division.
22/01300/FUL Coveney Coveney Methodist Church Main Street Coveney CB6 2DJ Change of use of redundant Methodist chapel to commercial use as an office.
22/01309/FUL Little Downham 6A Third Drove Little Downham CB6 2UE Temporary siting of mobile home to include timber cladding with raised decking platform to the frontage, alterations to agricultural building and external unit (retrospective).
22/01249/FUL Little Downham Wood Fen Lodge 6 Black Bank Road Little Downham Conversion of a seven-bed guest house into two self-catering holiday lodges (retrospective).
22/01311/CLE Little Downham Unit W2 & W3 Black Bank Business Centre Black Bank Road Little Downham Existing use at units W2 and W3 (B2 and B8).
22/01315/FUL Little Downham 31 Matthew Wren Close Little Downham CB6 2UL First floor extension above existing single storey side extension. Demolish part of boundary wall and erect fence.
22/01322/FUL Little Downham 10 Matthew Wren Close Little Downham CB6 2UL Single storey rear extension.
22/00525/VAR Sutton Land to north side of Mill Field Sutton To vary condition 12 (floor area) of previously approved 21/00485/OUT for proposed residential development of nine dwellings access road, car ports, garaging, visibility splays and associated site works.
22/01296/TEL Sutton Ely Road Old Alignment Sutton Proposed ARQIVA smart metering 1no. omni at 13.83m mean mounted on proposed 12m streetworks pole. Proposed ARQIVA smart metering 1no. gps antenna at 12.4m mean mounted on proposed streetworks pole. Proposed ARQIVA smart metering 1no. 3g omni antenna at 3.8m mean mounted on proposed streetworks pole. Proposed ARQIVA smart metering equipment enclosure to be installed on a root foundation
22/01263/LBC Sutton 22A High Street Sutton CB6 2RB Proposed single skylight window.
22/00945/FUL Sutton Rathless 1 Church Lane Sutton Replacement flat roof with a pitch roof and garage conversion.
22/01287/FUL Witchford 7 Briars End Witchford CB6 2GB Proposed single storey front/side extension.
You can find further information on the district council’s planning pages. If you would like to respond formally to the council about any planning application, please write to the district council and not to me. You can comment
online using the council’s public access web page (the link above);
Cambridgeshire County Council leaders have expressed disappointment that today’s Autumn statement from the Chancellor of the Exchequer does little to alleviate the financial burden faced by local authorities, putting at risk their ability to support the most vulnerable people and communities.
Like all other local authorities in England, the Council is facing a significant financial gap over each of the next five years, made worse by the impact of inflation, and a severe economic downturn. The County Council has already stated that its projected budget deficit for 2023/24 has doubled to £29m from its estimates at the start of the year, due to the unprecedented rises in inflation and the costs of goods and services
“Today’s budget – for that is what it is – does little to alleviate the issues that we and other councils across the UK are already facing,“ said Cllr Lucy Nethsingha, leader of Cambridgeshire County Council.
“Despite promises of increased support for both education and social care, with no certainty of sufficient new money, it is clear that the Government’s intention is that we use their suggestion of raising council tax by 5% to tackle some of the costs of the growing demand for our services. We remain concerned that this too falls on the shoulders of residents at a time when they are also struggling to afford to keep up with the cost of living.
“Once again, the Government has failed to address the most fundamental issue, the need for a Fairer Funding Review for local government, the lack of which continues to see Cambridgeshire being financially penalised. Having no longer-term certainty or funding settlement beyond the next 12 months further increases our risks at the same time as the demand for our services continues to escalate.
“Cambridgeshire has one of the lowest per capita funding levels in the country, and we will have to absorb inflation without any real terms funding increase to do so. Cambridgeshire, along with other County Councils, is faced with unenviable decisions about cutting services at a time when they are needed most. We echo the views expressed by other Councils, including both Hampshire and Kent County Councils earlier this week, in warning many councils risk bankruptcy without a clear long term funding solution.”
Cllr Elisa Meschini, Deputy Leader of the Council, added “This is, once again, a deeply disappointing financial statement by the Government. While we welcome the rise in the minimum wage, if the cost of this to organisations and businesses that provide us with service is not met by government it actually represents a further cut.
“Cambridgeshire has already had to deal with year-on-year funding reductions in each of the last 12 years, this cannot continue. Census information published just this year showed that the East of England is growing faster than anywhere else in the country – and Cambridge City was in the top three areas in the country for growth, yet this will not feed into our funding allocation for several more years.
“We are a net contributor to the UK economy and to the Treasury. The least we should expect is a commitment that funding will always increase to match growth, and as for the statement that the government is ‘recommitting’ to East West Rail – we’ve heard this before, and without funding it remains an empty promise.”
“All in all this does very little to support hard pressed families and vulnerable people and does not provide the certainty or investment needed by councils to support and protect our communities,“ agreed Cllr Tom Sanderson, leader of the council’s Independent Group.
“Our expectation for this budget was that there would be clarity, certainty, and a plan from Government for financial stability for local authorities, particularly following the recent and continuing economic turmoil which we have had to cope with,” Cllr Nethsingha added.
“Local government was and remains vital in supporting communities through a range of challenges, whether that was the Covid pandemic, the cost of living or climate crisis and in providing a welcoming and safe environment for people fleeing from Ukraine, or other war-torn areas. We were hoping for favourable changes to current local government settlements. Instead, we are once again faced with more cuts, greater risk and financial uncertainty.”
A reminder that the Greater Cambridge Partnership consultation on bus improvements and road charging is still live—and residents of East Cambridgeshire can have their say until midday on Friday 23 December.
The survey, information about the proposals, an interactive map, frequently asked questions, dates of public meetings, and ways to share your thoughts are all available at http://www.greatercambridge.org.uk/mc-2022.
There are three parts to the proposal.
(1) Transforming the bus network From mid-2023, transformation of the bus network through new routes, additional services, cheaper fares and longer operating hours.
(2) Investing in other sustainable travel schemes Investment in new sustainable travel schemes, such as better walking and cycling links, for areas in and immediately around Cambridge.
(3) Creating a Sustainable Travel Zone A Sustainable Travel Zone with a road user charge for driving within the zone between 7:00AM and 7:00PM on weekdays. This would fund the bus improvements and other travel schemes above. The Zone would be fully operational in 2027/28 but only once the first bus improvements were introduced.
Problems and solutions
Most people would agree that the level of public transport in Cambridgeshire is grim, and that traffic congestion in Cambridge is a problem which will only get worse with more growth. Better public transport would certainly help families that cannot afford a car, or those who cannot drive due to youth or age or poor health who still need to travel around. Fewer cars on the road would make more room for on-road public transport such as buses to run more quickly and to timetable.
The proposals include a scheme of exemptions, discounts, and refunds for various types of traveller.
However, it’s easier to get a consensus about the problems than about the solutions.
Where does the money come from to improve local public transport? The Government refused to fund Cambridgeshire’s bus improvement plan. The Chancellor’s statement today was full of tax rises, not spending increases, as he looks for £35-60Bn of cuts. The leaked suggestion by the Mayor of Cambridgeshire & Peterborough of setting a Mayoral precept for bus services, was strongly opposed by some local council leaders. If none of these, and if not a road charge, where does the money come from for the uplift in public transport we need?
Are buses the right solution? My personal view is that I would like to see a light rail or tram-style network, like the one I used as a tourist in Bordeaux this summer. Rails in the ground, stations with platforms, inspire confidence that the routes will still be there in six weeks’ time, that we know to our cost isn’t the same with bus services. But how do we get from here to there?
East Cambridgeshire counts
Above all, as an East Cambridgeshire councillor, I want to see a solution that connects our district properly into the emerging network around Cambridge. All the energy in the development of plans for public transport to date—whether it’s the guided busway, or Cambridge Connect’s light rail proposal—has been directed in a curve from south east of Cambridge up to Huntingdonshire, leaving East Cambridgeshire increasingly isolated. To an extent that’s a choice by East Cambridgeshire, whose leadership prefers to sit on the sidelines and throw rocks rather than engage in serious dialogue with its neighbours. But it’s not good for East Cambridgeshire residents.
Any solution—whether the one currently open to consultation or something different—must take the needs of East Cambridgeshire residents (including those without a car) into account, and give them better, cheaper, and more convenient public transport access to work, education, health care, leisure and retail. I’m not sure that what’s currently on the table gets that balance right.
How would the proposals affect how you and how you travel into and around Cambridge? Would you benefit from the bus proposals? Would your travel plans become easier, or more difficult?
Cambridgeshire’s Christmas Holiday Activities and Food programme is now open for booking.
Families in receipt of income-related free school meals can access a holiday scheme for up to 16 hours per child. The children will receive enriching experiences, a meal and snacks daily.
The County Council can arrange transport for those families who are unable to access the programme otherwise. Ukrainian and other refugee families are also eligible, as well as families struggling financially but not eligible for free school meals.
