The Cambridge Forum for the Construction Industry had their annual debate where in the format of a British Parliamentary-style debate (i.e. what you often see at the Oxford Union and the Cambridge Union) on how Cambridge should grow.
The motion was:
“This House believes that Cambridge should grow up (not out)”
Therefore the various things I posted quoting the various speakers should not be taken as a formal statement of policy by anyone – least of all the speakers! Furthermore, when a city growing as fast as Cambridge is, is presented with one of two options for growth, chances are they end up with both – and more. The past quarter of a century told us this. Anyone remember Cambridge Futures?
I blogged about it here in Lost Cambridge
Given the choice of either minimum growth or one-or-more of the six types of growth on offer, we effectively ended up with…all six.
Above – Cambridge Futures in Lost Cambridge via the Wayback Machine
The pre-Year2K graphics sort of give it away. The only one that might need explanation is the ‘Green Swap’ option – which in this context means building on the airport site. I.e. switching an existing industrial use that requires a lot of unproductive green and/or flat, undeveloped space for safety reasons (‘extensive space’) for a much more intensive use of space – eg high-rise accommodation for residential or office purposes.
“So, who won what?”
It was close – 56 in support of the motion, 52 against – although at the start of the debate in a show of hands, the majority appeared in favour of the motion.
The problem with knowing too much about either the policy area, the local history of the area, or both, is that it’s very difficult to take an all-encompassing motion at face value. Which is why when MPs are faced with such decisions in major pieces of legislation being voted upon, many will seek commitments from ministers during the debates.
For those of you unfamiliar with how laws are made see Parliament’s guide here (and scroll down to see their 8 minute video).
The second reading of any piece of legislation is one of the most important ones as the vote here signifies whether the Commons or Lords accepts or rejects the principles and objectives of the legislation before it. If the motion in the CFCI debate were a piece of legislation, it could be interpreted as giving the participating voters a choice on whether to have big bland boxy towers for Cambridge, or identikit car-friendly US-style suburban sprawl where everyone has a detached house, a swimming pool in their back yard, and space for a few motors in the front.
Not easy if you want neither – as the proponents and opponents found out
As I get older (and as my health inevitably declines), I find social events much harder to cope with
During my civil service days in my 20s I recall being encouraged to go to lots of events like these and to network-network-network. What I didn’t realise at the time (because ADHD had not been conceptualised in adults by the medical profession until 2008 – and it’s something we’re still learning more and more about) is that I was ‘masking’ throughout most of that time, and that in hindsight was one of the reasons why I burnt out and have ended up with CFS/ME. Hence not sticking around in the reception before the debate because the room was very noisy and my fatigue-ridden head couldn’t cope. (My apologies to anyone who wondered why I was sat there in silence!)
A second urban centre for Cambridge – yes or no?
This seemed to split the trio in support of the motion – Alex Levy of Cambridge University Estates recommended putting through the vision in this blogpost through an AI machine to see what comes out, while Sarah Hare said that the motion did not imply building a separate urban centre on previously undeveloped land. As the link above indicates, my suggested site indicates the southern end of Cambridge Airport as a location for a new urban centre with Cambridge East railway station as the rail and light-rail travel hub spilling out onto a new civic square looking north with:
- A new large grand and beautiful city hall for the new unitary council (Great Cambridge Hall – because we want Cambridge to become ‘Great’ – set out as you mean to go on)
- A new large lifelong learning centre and adult education college named after the late Sir Michael Marshall (because of the chronic skills shortage – and design it with the users who will be using it too – noting what Derby’s WEA produced in the 1960s)
- A new large concert hall as conceptualised by the former Cambridge University Vice Chancellor Sir Ivor Jennings back in June 1962, and initially worked up by Cambridge City Councils Architect and Chief Town Planner Gordon Logie (see here, scroll halfway down)
Above – Cambridge Hall – the title of Gordon Logie’s exploration of a new large public and concert hall as a joint town-gown project, in the Cambridgeshire Collection (see the same blogpost on details on how to access it in the Collection)
Above – WEA Derby and District – from a blogpost exploring what a world class offer for adult education and lifelong learning might be like in Cambridge
Above – Florence Ada Keynes – the Mother of Modern Cambridge. The drinks reception in the Cambridge Union earlier was in the Keynes Room – named after her eldest son. Behind every great man…
CFCI’s events are clearly popular – as they sell out very quickly!
Furthermore, I think there’s a wider civic role for a critical mass of their members
During the debate I wondered what a similar event would be like hosted either at, or primarily for Cambridge Regional College students and Cambridgeshire apprentices. Because let’s face it, an Oxbridge Union-style debate would have some people in our city running for the (mole)hills. Or the barricades. Now that I’m on the older side of 40 and with 2 heart attacks behind me, the things I’ve experienced in Cambridge in my lifetime (having spent my entire childhood here, and most of my adult life here too) look very different when viewed in the round rather than when viewed in isolation.
For example this evening it was I think Trinity College’s May Ball. I’m lucky enough to have experienced such events in my lifetime in times gone by. Yet the contrast between the state of Cambridge’s unclean streets struggling in the face of an underfunded and enfeebled city council unable to manage the city made for a depressing backdrop. Then there is the phenomenon of the boy-racers piercing the atmosphere of the city centre with unlawfully-modified motors – those in the very expensive price range going around as if looking for where the Central-London-style trendy night spots are in Cambridge, only to find they don’t exist.
The colleges inevitably restrict the activities of ‘town’ nightclubs when it comes to licensing, and our city is yet to build a new, sustainable night time entertainment quarter. (For those of you who think it’s the Cambridge Leisure Park, trust me, it isn’t. The young people are, sadly, voting with their feet. And I don’t blame them. Which is why the future of our city has to deliver social and economic justice as well as environmental sustainability for all of the talk of ‘jobs and growth’ that are the focus of ministers).
“What’s the CFCI’s role in turning around our city centre?”
In a nutshell there was a critical mass of young professionals in the room in their twenties. This is the generation that Cambridge needs to organise (or encourage to self-organise) and do some of the outreach to teenagers and young adults on the future of our city. I recall on several occasions teenagers at outreach events/open days through to friends of family saying to me that the most credible voices in their eyes comes from those who are a a few years older than them and who have been through some of the challenges that they are about to go through themselves. Which is why I’m completely the wrong person these days.
Hence why I’m really pleased with the work that the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Services Youth Engagement Service has been doing – and winning awards for. The next steps for me include:
- CFCI and Form the Future teaming up not only for careers-related events (if they haven’t done so already) but putting in place something that enables young people to come up with ideas and have them implemented in their communities.
- CFCI co-hosting more public-facing events similar to what I wrote about Anglia Ruskin University here, where in the context of solving shared problems of our city, more of the public become familiar with who does what in industry.
I know some of the things I suggest in blogposts like these sounds patronising or demanding. That’s not my intention and if anything reflects my own lack of knowledge. Because growing up in Cambridge (of all places) my generation of 1990s teenagers were not taught about how to influence decisions made about where we live – let alone the basics of politics, democracy, and the rule of law.
When running past workshops such as the one below at Rock Road Library where I invited participants to take away a book of their choice, the books that were the most popular were the introduction guides aimed at younger audiences rather than the heavier policy-related textbooks.
Above – informed by previous workshops, guess which title was the most popular with participants at my early democracy-in-action workshops…
Bringing together the many societies and groups in/around Cambridge together for a big Freshers-fair-style ‘Cambridge Societies Fair [for city and county]’ is precisely so that people who are civically minded can make those connections. Furthermore, it enables local government to have a big conversation about what the public wants/needs when it comes to information and events about the future of the city.
The future of Cambridge is a highly-contested one
Given the decline in the number of independent civic voices and commentators compared with say a decade ago, it’s all the more important that Cambridge brings through a new generation to replace previous ones. That includes those who might be interested in standing for election to local government or even to the boards of governors for schools, hospitals (Eg Addenbrooke’s and The Rosie with CUH NHS, through to our mental health services the CPFT NHS – it doesn’t have to involve party politics).
If the looming consultations on the Cambridge Growth Company and also the overhaul of local government cannot be the sparks that gets city and county civic life buzzing, then I don’t know what else will.
Food for thought?
If you are interested in the longer term future of Cambridge, and on what happens at the local democracy meetings where decisions are made, feel free to:
- Follow me on BSky <- A critical mass of public policy people seem to have moved here
- Like my Facebook page
- Consider a small donation to help fund my continued research and reporting on local democracy in and around Cambridge.
The Cambridge Town Owl 