View the full debate above.
Who Decides Cambridge’s Future?
On 23 March 2026, Cambridge Past, Present & Future hosted a public debate on the government’s proposals for a new Development Corporation (DevCo) for Greater Cambridge.
The discussion focused on a key question: if a Development Corporation is introduced, what does that mean for how decisions about Cambridge’s future are made?
What Is Being Consulted On?
The question the government was asking, was not about whether a Development Corporation should be created. That decision appears to have already been made by government.
Rather, the consultation focuses on two areas:
- The powers that a Development Corporation should have
- The geographic area it should cover
However, there is an important structural issue. Government-led Development Corporations are established through existing legislation, which requires that their decision-making boards are not made up of a majority of elected representatives.
This means decision-making is intentionally shifted away from locally elected politicians, on the basis that non-elected experts may be better placed to take complex or difficult decisions.
The Question of Democratic Accountability
Local politicians play a central role in local democracy. They are elected to represent residents and to make decisions about how places grow and change.
Crucially, they can be held accountable through elections.
A Development Corporation changes this dynamic. It removes decision-making from those who are directly accountable to voters, and therefore reduces the ability of residents to influence how their city develops.
What Problems Is the Development Corporation Meant to Solve?
Greater Cambridge already has an established planning system. The area has:
- An award-winning planning service
- Delivery of significant numbers of homes and employment space
- Approved plans for 37,000 additional homes and around 10 years’ worth of employment space
However, there are significant infrastructure challenges that planning alone cannot resolve. These include:
- Utilities such as water, wastewater, and electricity
- Transport infrastructure
- Green and blue infrastructure, including parks, nature reserves, and chalk streams
- Social infrastructure such as schools, healthcare, and cultural facilities
Addressing these deficits is essential to creating a greener, fairer city and improving quality of life.
The Housing Challenge
The most significant issue identified is the cost of housing.
Many people working in Cambridge cannot afford to live in the city. As a result, they are increasingly living further afield, including in Suffolk, Essex, Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire, and across Cambridgeshire.
This pattern creates additional transport pressures and environmental impacts.
Despite planning permission for tens of thousands of homes over the past 20 years, the private housing market has not delivered homes that are affordable to local workers.
Without changes to how the housing market operates, the introduction of a Development Corporation is unlikely to address this core issue.
Complexity and Governance
There is also concern about the number of overlapping authorities involved in decision-making.
While Local Government Reorganisation may remove one layer of governance, a Development Corporation would introduce another.
This could create tension between:
- A new unitary authority for Greater Cambridge
- The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough strategic authority
- The Development Corporation
All of these bodies would have responsibilities related to planning and transport, potentially increasing complexity and confusion.
What Is Needed Instead?
Cambridge Past, Present & Future believes there are four key priorities that are necessary for addressing Greater Cambridge’s long-term growth challenges:
- A clear, long-term vision
A bold and coherent strategy that can endure political change, comparable to established models such as Copenhagen’s Finger Plan or Ghent’s Circulation Plan. - Reform of the housing market
Structural change to enable the delivery of genuinely affordable housing for workers. - Infrastructure investment and delivery
Government funding and intervention to address critical infrastructure deficits. - Strategic planning at the right scale
The ability to plan across the wider Cambridge economic area, including neighbouring districts and counties.
Rethinking Public Engagement
Delivering long-term change requires a process that is both transparent and inclusive.
Traditional consultation methods, such as those used for Local Plans, often:
- Reach limited audiences
- Are highly technical
- Require significant time and expertise to engage with
Cambridge Past, Present & Future believes an alternative approach should involve the use of a Citizens’ Assembly, supported by a wide range of expert input. The Lambeth Kerbside Strategy is an example of a plan shaped through this kind of process.
The Need for a Democratic Mandate
Significant or controversial changes require a clear democratic mandate.
It is unlikely that consensus will always be reached between different local authorities on complex issues, such as transport infrastructure or funding mechanisms.
Examples from other cities suggest that transformational change is most effective when it is:
- Based on a clear public mandate
- Led by a democratically accountable figure
- Presented to voters as part of a wider vision or manifesto
A Final Consideration
Cambridge Past, Present & Future believes that the proposed Development Corporation is an experimental and unproven model, which we believe will:
- Add further complexity to governance structures
- Increase political conflict
- Lead to inefficiencies in the use of public funds
- Create confusion about roles and responsibilities
- Reduce public trust
These risks stand in contrast to the need for clarity, accountability, and public confidence in shaping Cambridge’s future.
You can read our official response to the government consultation HERE
