A motion for a referendum to take place across Cambridgeshire asking residents if they want to pay a charge in order to receive improvements in public transport was lost today (March 21). 

At a meeting of Cambridgeshire County County’s full council, Chair, Cllr Stephen Ferguson used his discretion to allow two items which have already generated high levels of public interest, to be dealt with at specific times on the agenda and be linked to any public questions or petitions related to them. 

One of these was the motion put forward by Cllr Steve Count calling for a local poll to be conducted across the county asking residents about paying a charge for public transport. 

This motion followed a petition on the same subject and was presented to members. 

The petition titled ‘Cambridgeshire Residents Group (CRG) Demands from Cambridgeshire County Council a Referendum on the Proposed Congestion Charge!’ had nearly 16,000 signatures at the time of writing this report. 

The Greater Cambridge Partnership’s (GCP) consultation for members of the public to have their say on the proposed congestion charge for Cambridge closed on December 23 with 24,000 responses. 

The debate and vote

At the meeting, members voted on whether to go ahead with a referendum, not on the Making Connection proposals themselves. 

The debate started off with public questions to Chair of the Highways and Transport Committee, Cllr Alex Beckett about the congestion charge and the GCP consultation. 

It then continued with information given about the petition organised by Cambridge resident Kieran Johnson, and then went to long debate, with many councillors having their say on the motion. 

Cllr Alex Beckett said: “While it may seem a democratic way to let the people have their say, the reality is that they [referendums] can often lead to division and even dangerous outcomes. 

“Take for example Brexit referendum in 2016. This asked us all whether we wanted to leave the European Union, except it didn’t ask us all, it asked British people over the age of 18 if they wanted to leave.” 

Cllr Beckett added that a referendum “doesn’t decide the matter” and are “not always the final solution”. 

“This is a complex issue which requires serious and thorough work, and we’ve seen that with the truly historic levels of response with the GCP consultation,” he said. 

“We owe it to the people to let the GCP go through the 24,000 responses and make sure people’s voices are heard.” 

Speaking for the referendum, Cllr Steve Tierney said: “What I’m most worried about in this criticism of referendums is mistrustful of the public. 

“It suggests that you’re [the council] capable of thinking of these deep issues but they aren’t - but of course they are.” 

Cllr Tierney believed that a referendum was “necessary” and said he doesn’t always say that because they are “expensive”. 

“You wouldn’t want to have a referendum for every small decision you make, but this fulfils the need for a referendum for two reasons” he said. 

“First of all, it is fundamentally transformative of the area. It will affect everyone, and it will affect them dramatically forever. 

“The second reason is because, you could argue ‘we’ll go ahead anyway’ if you’d already made the case and gone to the public in the previous election and said, ‘this is what we’re going to do, please vote for us’ and then they all voted for you. 

“Of course, then you’ve got a mandate, and can say you don’t need to have a referendum.” 

When voting, 24 councillors voted in favour of the referendum, and 32 against, meaning the motion was lost.