Representation by Rodney Wythe
- Date submitted
- 14 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
We run our accountancy practice as a business, whereby expenditure is made only when its necessary and affordable, and there is a continuous monitoring of the need to ensure there is enough income generated to properly fund the firm. And in this case of moving a sewage plant, where there is essentially government money involved, the very same business ethos should be applied. With the business ‘hat’ worn, it seems incredulous that there is any contemplation of this relocation given that there is actually no real genuine need to move the existing plant, as confirmed by Anglian Water, the carbon cost of such a relocation would be extremely harmful to the environment and the loss of Green Belt countryside, which itself is being far too rapidly eroded throughout the country, means a further sad detrimental effect on wildlife and as well, of course, on Cambridge residents. Given the above factors, its incomprehensible to me that any commercial decision can be sensibly made in favour of the proposed relocation, even if one takes into account the far too common attitude of ‘…if there’s government money available, this must be spent, regardless of any expenditure validity’. I would question whether the government has been properly and professionally informed of exactly why this £227m ‘donation’ is needed in the first place, given the fact this sum has apparently been made available despite the very obvious need for funds elsewhere in the country. This, itself, of course becomes another separate issue and this same query arises time and again, sadly. But, having said that, just because the government has seemingly been ‘sucked in’ to award this amount of funding, it definitely should not be the case that the relocation plan must now go ahead to ‘use up’ this taxpayers’ money, when there is absolutely no business, ethical or environmental case to support it.