On top of the three originally proposed, Huntingdonshire district has made a pitch to go it alone, while the MPs for Peterborough and North West Cambridgeshire (messrs Pakes and Carling respectively) have made a pitch to split Huntingdonshire into two.
Which is a bold move for all concerned. In particular the proposal to split the historic county of Huntingdonshire into two, effectively getting rid of it completely. Does it make sort of sense? Have a look below.
Above – from Sam Carling MP (Lab – NW Cambs)
The pitch for the above involves separating rural Fenland and other rural parts of Cambridge from the rapidly growing areas of Greater Cambridge, and also Peterborough mindful of the GNER railway line that comes up from London. It remains to be seen whether it would be possible to open any new railway stations on what is a national main line, or whether there may be an equivalent light rail for Peterborough and surrounding areas.
Huntingdonshire’s bold bid for unitary status
You can read the press release here. As things stand, it won’t happen. The criteria set by ministers pointed towards a population of 500,000 as what they are looking for in new unitary council areas. While Greater Cambridge can make the case due to the Government’s ambitions to build tens of thousands more homes in the area which will take it over the 500,000 mark, Huntingdonshire currently has a total population of under 200,000. (Just over 186,000 as of mid-2023 estimates). Essentially it would have to consent to building at least two additional newtowns on top of existing growth at Alconbury.
Consultation events full of old people like me
I mentioned this to a couple of the councillors there. Now in my mid-40s, I shouldn’t be in a situation where my presence *brings down* the average age of the people in the hall or meeting.
While there’s no chance of getting enough people up to speed in order to influence the outcome – in the grand scheme of things I think ministers have already decided broadly what will happen with Cambridge in the medium term, I’d like to think we could come up with a longer term civic engagement programme for children, teenagers, and young adults in our city and county. This is because the changes proposed are going to take decades. Furthermore, I fear that the climate emergency is going to force the issue on a whole host of things in ways that we cannot possibly predict. In particular it will mean some unexpectedly expensive infrastructure interventions – the likes of which will require substantive workforce retraining programmes on the scale that we’ve not seen since wartime.
As I also mentioned to councillors, the scale of Cambridge’s housing growth and housing need will inevitably create stronger economic forces that will make the incorporation of some of the towns over the county boundary almost inevitable. Haverhill, Royston, and Newmarket to name three. I remain of the view that ministers should have brought back the Redcliffe-Maud proposals of 1969 from Harold Wilson’s Labour Government and started their negotiations with the maps of that commission’s proposals
Due to the scale of housebuilding, I don’t expect the ‘Greater Cambridge’ unitary to last for more than a couple of decades at most.
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
- Spot me on LinkedIn
- 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 