Intervention by a Cranleigh ‘businessman’ has prompted another local row over a petition to stop a private care home and replace it with an MIU in Cranleigh.


Screen Shot 2019-08-25 at 10.06.42.png

They say they want the money trousered by a ‘charity’ to be used instead for a Minor Injuries Unit/ Urgent Care Centre. 

Donors claim they raised £1.4m over almost 20 years for A HOSPITAL + Day Hospital + a Minor Injuries Unit! Not a 60-bed commercial development on former parish-owned land.

Neither will they support 20 community beds for patients who come from anywhere, other than from the donor villages.

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 08.14.47 The self-appointed spokesman for… Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust the Chamber of Trade; Knowle Park Country Park Initiative; etc – Martin Bamford “AKA – I am not a spokesman for the Charity”  told Andy Webb – Cranleigh Community Group founder and the man who started the petition that he had “his own agenda,” and had changed the title. See below.

Screen Shot 2019-08-24 at 23.21.20.png

However, here’s what Change.Org says about the Petition which already boasts over 2,500 signatures and comments.

Screen Shot 2019-08-25 at 09.21.13.png

A further twitter feed of invective is aimed at others – including the Waverley Web, which we will not give the benefit of airtime. However, perhaps we would respectfully suggest that Mr. Bamford or ‘The BB” as he is known locally reads some of the letters on Waverley’s Planning Portal and on the on-line Petition Website. As the important issue here is?

What do the residents of Cranleigh and the eastern villages want? Really, really want?

  • Do they want a private 60 – bed private care home, 20 community beds and 26 bedsits on a site they owned and which was sold to a charity by Cranleigh Parish Council for £1?
  • Do they want Mr. Chai Patel’s HC-One Nursing Home Group – 800m in debt and up for sale – granted a 150-year lease – effectively a freehold – in return for 60 private beds for anyone, anywhere (circa £1,200 p.w minimum) and 20 social care beds for patients from within the Guildford & Waverley Clinical Commissioning Group/Surrey County Council, and £1m towards 26 bedsits for health workers from anywhere in Surrey?  


  • Do they want the application turned down in September by Waverley Planners  for sound planning reasons: – Due to the lack of community benefit, overdevelopment of a site in an area which floods; adjacent and overlooking a Waverley council development; adjacent to  access to a Berkeley Homes development of 425 homes, delivery accesses to Sainsburys’ and M & S Foods and one of the worst junctions from a country lane into the centre of Cranleigh High Street?


  •  the money the villages raised donated to the Cranleigh League of Friends which boasts over £2m in its coffers, and which has just shelled out £400,000 for a new X-Ray department to complement diagnostics and other services in the old Cranleigh Cottage Hospital. This would enable it to persuade health officials to provide an Urgent Care Centre in the old Day Hospital – a building which was also donated by – yes you guessed – the villagers of Cranleigh and the nearby villages? An empty building that has oodles of available space? The League is led by its trusted chairman who was asked to resign from Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust after a backlash from its members. The League’s president, also a CVHT Trustee, was also asked to resign.


We rest the case – and let the good people of Cranleigh & Villages tell their elected representatives and their fellow decision-makers on Waverley’s Joint Planning Committee from around the borough  – what THEY really want their money – and their land –  used for?

Two towns with the same aim in Waverley? But Cranleigh says “NO” to a private Care Home.

Is a bad deal better than no deal – for the residents of the eastern villages?







Doesn’t this new Government Document about Conservation of habitats and species legislation prove that Cllr Gerry Hyman was right all along?



Screen Shot 2018-12-18 at 10.14.35

For years “Your Waverley’s officers have stuck their heads in the sand and ignored the species extinction planning laws (‘Habitats’) Will they continue to ignore it now? Or will they continue serving up the same advice to councillors, that they have in the past?

Regular readers of the Waverley Web will know of the Marmite relationship Waverley officers and some councillors have with the Farnham Residents’ Rebel incarnate – Cllr Jerry Hyman. The man who founded the Farnham Residents Group – whose Chairman John Ward is now Leader of the council.

Love him or hate him – there is no doubt when it comes to the controversial issue of assessing the extinction of species, which he is passionate about, that in the main he is either ignored or censored for his views.  However, we accept that we, and others, find the Habitats Regulations Assessment  pretty impenetrable

Protecting the Special Protection Areas around Farnham, and everywhere else, – Designated European Nature Conservation Sites has been one of his prime concerns ever since he joined Waverley Borough Council in 2016. Formerly he held a seat on the influential Joint Planning Committee but this was denied him in the new administration. Mainly by his own FRs colleagues.

However, perhaps his group – Waverley Planning officers, and everyone else, including the borough’s legal experts should think again…? and.. perhaps so should Government Inspectors?

This includes some information from The Planning Magazine.

Screen Shot 2019-08-19 at 09.54.57

The entirely new Guidance on the use of Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA), was published by the government earlier this week as part of a series of updates to its Planning Practice Guidance.
The move aims to address confusion among practitioners following the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ’s) landmark People over Wind ruling on HRAs in April last year. Any plans or projects in or near EU-designated special areas of conservation or special protection areas must undergo HRAs before they are adopted or gain permission.Screen Shot 2019-08-19 at 22.39.30.png

Outlining the “key principles which can be considered by competent authorities when considering whether appropriate assessment is required,” the guidance says that “it would appear that off-site Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspaces may be considered as a mitigation measure under People over Wind as their primary purpose is to draw recreational pressure away from sites and so prevent an adverse effect from occurring. In these cases, the competent authority must now assess the robustness of mitigation measures through an appropriate assessment.”

Elsewhere, the document says that “an appropriate assessment for a more strategic plan, such as the local plan, can consider the impacts on sites and confirm the suitability or likely success of mitigation measures for associated non-strategic policies and projects.”

It adds that “an individual assessment of non-strategic policies and projects may not be necessary in some limited cases where the strategic appropriate assessment is sufficiently robust”.

Outlining what an appropriate assessment should contain, the guidance says that it “must contain complete, precise and definitive findings and conclusions to ensure that there is no reasonable scientific doubt as to the effects of the proposed plan or project”.

It adds: “The competent authority will require the applicant to provide such information as may reasonably be required to undertake the assessment.”

In February, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) published revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in light of the People Over Wind ruling.


Paragraph 177 of the July 2018 version of the NPPF had disapplied the presumption in favor of sustainable development if a project required an appropriate assessment, regardless of whether that assessment then found no harm to the site was likely.

But in February, the MHCLG amended paragraph 177 by reinstating the presumption where the appropriate assessment found the project or plan would not affect the integrity of the habitats sites, for example by proposing mitigation measures. 

Screen Shot 2019-08-19 at 11.07.48.png

But of course – ‘Your Waverley’ will continue to ignore it – along with others.



Crest proud of its Blightwells progress? But what about its drone licence? Is it making its own rules…again?


Crest has just released a drone video showing the progress made of flattening East Street. We’ve taken some screenshots too, so you can quickly get a birdseye view.

Meanies that we are – with a little help from one of our Farnham friends – we respectfully ask Crest Nicholson?
It’s interesting to see Crest Nicholson’s aerial footage on the web. This footage was filmed by a drone that was flying illegally over public spaces. If the pilot has a  licence then the CAA will impose a fine on the pilot. If the pilot does not have a licence then they will still be fined and encouraged to take part in the CAA drone training program.

Here are the CAA guidelines on drone usage – might we suggest that Crest Nicholson take note!

powered by Advanced iFrame free. Get the Pro version on CodeCanyon.



We here at the Waverley Web are also keen to update our Brightwells sticker book of new shops coming to the development. We’ve checked on the development website, but there is no more news. They say:

Current retailers legally committed to Brightwells Yard are Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Ask, Seasalt and Reel Cinemas.

Given the early phase of the development, this is an ordinary level of lettings, and Crest Nicholson will be using the successful marketing strategy they have used on commercial aspects of many developments elsewhere to fill the units over time.

We have however updated our sticker book to reflect Surrey’s long lease land investment in the commercial rental contract, which takes the pressure off Waverley.


Appeal allowed for three luxury homes bordering the Devil Jumps Special Protection Area in Churt!


Last week a Government Inspector allowed an appeal for three new luxury homes to be built right next door to the Devils Jumps – a Designated European Nature Conservation site in Churt.

If the Planning Inspectorate can allow building here – it can allow it anywhere.

Q After this decision. Do you still think the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is safe?

Screen Shot 2019-08-18 at 22.56.16.png

A spate of appeals in the Farnham area have been allowed by the Planning Inspectorate over the last few weeks, but none so daunting as the decision Screen Shot 2019-08-18 at 22.55.10.pngto allow three new homes on a site near the Devils Jumps in Churt. A SPA.

Other appeals have been decided in the last month. Such as Branksome house, where the inspectorate allowed a larger scheme days after the committee approved a smaller one which they thought was taking its place…

Also Green Farm in Badshot Lea where an appeal was allowed and the developer has been able to drop the number of “affordable” homes from 18 to 13 using section 73. According to the inspector, this really is nothing more than a “minor material amendment” and he even allowed a costs application against Waverley! Another Joint Planning Committee decision overruled, like so many others.

Neighbours together with Farnham Residents have been fighting development near the Special Protection Area, and in the Green Belt at Borrow House, Jumps Road, Churt, Farnham GU10 2LB by Monachus Estates Ltd,  for a very long time. And it will be a huge comfort to them that the Inspector Mr. Martin Allen “noted their concerns!’  But as you will see – he didn’t share their concerns.

Screen Shot 2019-08-18 at 22.51.03.png

Part of the site comprises 19 old Nissen type huts which have existed there for some time, and the new homes would occupy the same locations. So the Inspector agreed with the developer this would result in a reduction in the amount of built development already on the land. Also as the three homes would have ‘flat green roofs’ and their height would be limited, devekopment would, in his opinion, significantly improve the openness of the site within the Green Belt.

 Natural England – yet again – raised no objection and was more than content that no harm could be caused to wildlife! Last we heard, Natural England doesn’t have enough staff to monitor anything- as mos have been seconded to help with a ‘No Deal’ Brexit?

Screen Shot 2019-08-18 at 22.47.40.png

So there you have it, folks. We can all sleep easily in our beds knowing that it doesn’t really matter what ‘Your Waverley’s’ planners decide because the Government’s Planning Inspectorate knows better.

So why in God’s name don’t we just bin the ballot box and let the Government build just where it damn well likes. And, let the countryside – Special Protection Areas and the wildlife –  bats, birds, bees and trees all go along with the Devil’s Jumps to hell in a handcart?

Screen Shot 2019-08-18 at 22.57.32.png

Two towns​ with the same aim in Waverley? But Cranleigh says “NO” to a private Care Home.


In and around Haslemere the broken limbs sprains strains and minor wounds rock up to Haslemere Hospital’s Minor Injuries Unit. All you have to do is ring ahead to let them know you are coming.

01483 782334

However, if you have the above in the town of Cranleigh or the surrounding villages – you have to get in the car, the bus or bike 12 miles to the Royal Surrey County Hospital in Guildford. Where you might spend half-an-hour, on a good day, finding a car parking space?

Haslemere Town Councillor Terry Weldon says that the Minor Injuries Unit in Haslemere is a great resource – but says it could be under threat if it cannot be upgraded to an Urgent Care Centre. He says the townsfolk must not allow it to close, so they must attend a meeting at Hasleway, in Haslemere on September 16th.

Meanwhile back in the eastern villages – Cranleigh people are signing a petition to stop a 60-bed Private Care Home and 20 community beds being built, favouring the opening of a Minor Injuries Unit like Haslemere’s in the old cottage hospital’s Day Hospital. A facility they claim will be of much greater benefit to the many thousands of new homeowners descending on the eastern area in their droves.

The Petition that will go before Waverley Planners in September in a bid to stop the development on former parish owned land.

Screen Shot 2019-08-13 at 08.20.12.png

2,094 people have already signed the Cranleigh Petition.Screen Shot 2019-08-13 at 08.23.26.png

You can sign on this link below:

Screen Shot 2019-08-13 at 08.23.37.png

Paper petitions too are available in numerous local shops and business premises and the Cranleigh Community Group has asked us to thank the huge number of local shops and businesses who have agreed to help the campaign. Also to Stonescapes of Cranleigh who have sponsored the car stickers soon to appear on car windscreens and C & A Tickner Printers who is sponsoring the stationary.

Any proceeds from the sale of car stickers or any donations from the campaign will go to The League of Friends of Cranleigh’s (old) Village Hospital. Which the organisers sdsy must not be confused with Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust, which has constantly used the word ‘HOSPITAL’ in its publicity for the new private CARE HOME.

Is a bad deal better than no deal – for the residents of the eastern villages?


Just WINGS this time no WHEELS – between Alfold and Dunsfold​.


Screen Shot 2019-08-18 at 20.50.07.png

For those of you who may have forgotten.

Or have just arrived on Planet Waverley, a while back there was a planning application to build an 8,000 sq metre warehouse/museum in a green field on a small rural road just a hop, skip and a fence away from Dunsfold Aerodrome. An application, which passed largely unnoticed by many but was refused by Waverley planners.

Now the developer – has appealed to the Government to overturn this decision and an Inspector will be appointed to decide. This appeal will be based on written representations – so everyone’s views are now very important.

It is a very worrying fact that numerous schemes refused locally are now being overturned by the Government!

‘The Wings Museum’ is presently based in Balcombe, Sussex in a large hanger-style building which aims to provide an insight into life in World War 11. It contains memorabilia from the Battle of Britain, the Blitz, The Home Guard, Bomber Command etc.

It was first registered with ‘Your Waverley’ in 2016, – and took years to grind through the planning process?

Having outgrown its existing 12,000 sq ft home, the Trustees acquired a green field off a rural lane in Dunsfold and, despite a minimal income of circa £20,000 per annum, has grand plans to build a 4,000 sq metre building in phase one of their development and grow it to 8,000 sq metres in due course. Its appeal is for an 8,000-metre building.

With projected visitor numbers of some 20,000 per annum, it is hard to imagine a site less suited to be a museum.  If consented visitors will be obliged to approach the venue via Dunsfold village or the Alfold Crossway Junction with the A281, wending their way down single track rural roads with few passing places and multiple blind bends. This is particularly concerning given that a location plan, submitted with the planning application, shows a large area given over to coach parking!!!

Our followers over there nearly choked on their cornflakes when contemplating a 52-seater coach navigating the narrow confines of The Crossways into Dunsfold Road!!! Woe betides the driver if they happen to meet a Cranleigh Freight HGV en route! That’s an encounter they say they would pay good money to see!

The Museum’s original planning application garnered a number of expressions of support primarily, it must be said, from existing Wings Museum enthusiasts, none of whom, it appears live in Waverley. Surprise! Surprise! Folkestone, Worthing, Kingswood and Horley are but a few of the outposts from which these supporters hail and, clearly, they don’t have a clue about the location of their pet project which one local objector refers to as ‘a rural location: reference to Policy RE1 Countryside beyond the Green Belt in the new 2018 LPP1′.

Reading their correspondence, some of the Wings enthusiasts seem to be under the mistaken impression that the new Museum will be situated on Dunsfold Aerodrome itself but that isn’t the case. As far as we can ascertain from the locals over there, it appears to be situated on land formerly owned by the Barnfield Estate.

 Barnfield is a property – which has been on and off the market like a yo-yo for a number of years now – formerly owned by Rupert Howell, of Trinity Mirror Group (owners of the Sorry Advertiser). Now sold to an unknown buyer? Any clues to whom, anyone?

We at the Waverley Web aren’t planning experts but believe, the size of the proposed museum structure – at a height of circa 15 metres – is larger than almost all the existing hangers and industrial units at nearby Dunsfold Park. It has been claimed the proposed new building could comfortably accommodate…

Screen Shot 2019-08-18 at 22.27.47.png

The Waverley Web concurs with the locals that the proposed location of the new Wings Museum is completely inappropriate.  Why the hell would an Inspector consent to a development on this scale on a greenfield site when it could so much more easily and sensibly be accommodated on an adjacent brownfield site? A brownfield site, moreover, that already has a small museum of its own which according to its Masterplan will have a new Museum over the course of the development. But looking elsewhere (Farnham) at recent appeal decisions, stranger things have happened. 

Several objectors point out that they fail to see how such a small charity as the Wings Museum – with annual receipts of circa £22,000 from approximately 5,000 visitors – can possibly afford the construction and development of a multi-million-pound project which would increase the size of its existing museum to six times that of its current site.

The recently opened Aerospace Museum in Bristol, whose running costs were £1.25 million in its first year, had over 150,000 visitors, generating receipts of some £1.91 million. These figures alone call into question the commercial viability of the Wings Museum’s proposal:

  •  If it is deemed to be commercially viable then it follows that the visitor numbers will, necessarily, be huge and this greenfield site on a badly maintained single-track country lane with few passing places and very poor public transport links simply could not cope with them.
  •  If once consented and built, the Museum proves to be unviable, what will happen to the building? Will the museum’s trustees/benefactors seek a change of use to warehousing or other industrial uses?

And that begs another question:

Why did Mr Rupert Howell  – sell off one of his fields to the Wings Museum when he and his wife were keen supporters of the Stop Dunsfold New Town Campaign?

 Why on earth would they sell to someone who could inflict damage to all their Alfold neighbours by allowing someone to park another bloody great hanger on their back lawns?

Chocks away for another Dunsfold Museum?

Is it right that the Government spends 43 times more per mile on national roads ​than ​local roads?​


Screen Shot 2019-07-07 at 09.48.26.png

Do our county councillors realise how many holiday dramas occurred – thanks to potholes ?

Screen Shot 2019-07-07 at 09.33.49.pngScreen Shot 2019-07-07 at 09.34.27.png

Money councils have been forced to cut from road maintenance funding since 2010 could have paid for the repair of nearly 8 million potholes, analysis by the Local Government Association has revealed.

At the LGA’s Annual Conference in Bournemouth, town hall leaders are calling on the Government to use this year’s Spending Review to deliver a long-term funding plan “to save our roads”.

Latest figures show that the amount of money councils have been able to spend on routine road maintenance has fallen from £1.1 billion in 2009/10 to around £701 million in 2017/18 – a 37 per cent reduction.

Routine road maintenance includes minor road repairs such as potholes, cleaning drains, inspection and fixing street lighting.

The LGA, which represents councils in England and Wales, estimates that this reduction could have covered the cost of repairing 7.8 million potholes.

With councils having lost 60p out of every £1 in central government funding between 2010 and 2020, services such as road maintenance have had to be stripped back to pay for an ongoing surge in demand for children’s services, adult social care support and homelessness support.

Councils are presently fixing a pothole every 17 seconds but it will still take more than £9 billion and a decade to tackle our road repairs backlog. A review is now urgently needed to make long-term improvements on our dilapidated roads.

The LGA’s Transport spokesman, Cllr Martin Tett, said:

“Potholes can be the bane of the motorist’s life. They can damage vehicles and cause accidents.

“Councils are on the side of the motorist and are doing all they can to keep our roads safe and resilient, repairing potholes as quickly as they can.

“But unprecedented funding cuts have meant councils are increasingly limited in how much they can invest in looking after our country’s roads.

“It is not right that the Government spends 43 times per mile more on maintaining our national roads – which make up just 3 per cent of all roads – than on local roads, which are controlled by councils and make up 97 per cent of England’s road network.

“While the extra one-off funding announced in recent years has helped, we need the government to follow with a long-term funding plan to save our roads in the Spending Review.”

Councils spent £1,113,694,000 on environmental, safety and routine maintenance of principle and other LA roads in 2009/10

They spent £701,429,000 in 2017/18

This amounts to a £412,265,000 reduction, which could cover the cost of paying for 7.8 million pothole repairs, based on an average pothole repair cost of £53.

2. Estimated average pothole repair costs

3. ALARM survey key facts – councils fixing a pothole every 17 seconds

4. The LGA’s #CouncilsCan campaign aims to influence the forthcoming Spending Review and highlight the growing risk to vital local services if the Government does not take action to secure the financial sustainability of councils. Visit our campaign page for more information.


The gas/oilman commeth with a little bit of help from our county council friends?


Screen Shot 2019-08-16 at 10.24.18.png

Well done’ Your Waverley’s’ first listening exercise was a rollicking success – and there are calls for more.

Would you Adam and Eve it? Surrey could be backing fracking in our borough!

Now we understand from our friends across the other side of the county that the council bordering the Waverley Borough in Mole Valley is being ignored too!


Screen Shot 2019-08-12 at 20.58.47.png

In August 2018, SCC approved the (part) retrospective application for the unauthorised Brockham sidetrack, despite Mole Valley District Council’s unanimous vote to object to it.  You can read it here:

Be warned Surrey County Councillors! You heard it here first. It is not long until the next county council elections – look what happened in Guildford; Waverley; Woking; and numerous other Surrey borough councils in May.

Start listening to your constituents, or it may come to bite you very hard in your posteriors, and you too will be looking to spend more time with your families.

Notalota folks around for Cranleigh’s ‘fundraising’ concert? But who gets the blame for the cancellation?


Yes, you guessed – ‘Your Waverley!’

A statement from the organisers of the 1170 Folk Concert heralded by some as –  THE music event everyone has been waiting for – has been CANCELLED!

However, their statement outlining the reasons for the sudden cancellation is very odd.

 It blames ‘Your Waverley’ (YW) or, maybe the parish council, for not licensing the concert sooner, not enough sponsors to fund it, and the risk the charity would face?
Why would the charity risk anything – apart from not getting any funds? Curious?

Well – let’s start at the beginning and tell the truth and crack at least one of the porkies.

You know us, we are quick to give dear old ‘WBC’ a dig in the ribs for the errors it makes, and perish the thought we should become the defender of the faith. But let’s put the record straight:

‘YW’ sprung into action before the May election voting slips were cold.  The Licencing Committee wasn’t even officially formed under the council’s New Guard. However, its interim quasi-judicial former committee bent over backwards and did double somersaults to provide the organisers with their licence to make money for the church!

 Led by acting chairman Michael Goodridge, it leapt into action, only days after the polls, to prevent any delay.

 So eager was she to see the licence approved Cranleigh’s Cllr Patricia Ellis threw normal caution to the wind for a new, untried and untested event, at an untried and tested venue, and supported it becoming an annual event! WOW! Had the organisers promised her a spot in the line-up? However, not everyone was quite so keen.  Cranleigh Parish Council was more cautious, objecting for lack of sufficient information and concerns about traffic in Knowle Lane, Alfold Road and Elmbridge Road.

Will a Folk Concert herald the opening of the new Cranleigh By-Pass?

As for the sponsors.cranleighfolksponsors

The list of sponsors looks pretty heavyweight to us simple souls that we are?

Bellway Homes and The Berkeley Group (not the normal sponsors of a music festival?!) But, say the organisers, they have not met the desired sponsorship targets! Really! Surely ‘lettuce and Leahfy’ are putting their hands into their very deep and well-filled pockets too? After all, wasn’t this event they told the parish council would be the forerunner for future public events attracting  20/30,000 people? Surely Knowle Park’s owners – developers KPI and A2-Dominion – who already boast planning consents coming out of their ears are backing the concert?

Well, you don’t seek a licence for a festival if you don’t have the backing do you, outdoor concerts are such a great risk these days!

Or did they mean the line-up is so poor, and the marketing so bad, they have failed to sell any tickets, in a very busy and competitive market?

(Weyfest in Tilford Farnham this weekend.

 Kenny Jones’s Rock and Horsepower concert at Ewhurst this weekend,

The Secret Widget Festival at Ewhurst 30th Aug -1st Sept.) says: It is with regret that the organisers announce that the Cranleigh Folk Festival due to be held in Knowle Park from the 13th-15th September 2019 has been postponed.
The Folk Festival is designed to provide funds for the 1170 charity which supports the restoration work required for St Nicholas Church Cranleigh. The decision to postpone the event has been taken after careful consideration and is done to ensure the charity is not compromised financially.

The organisers believe that circumstances have conspired to create a significant financial risk that they are not willing to take. The event planning was severely delayed through the licencing process that included objections raised during this process and so extended the time frame by several months. For a first-time event, this has proved to be a major handicap in marketing, engaging the festival audience and securing the requisite sponsorship.

Whilst broad support for the event in the village has been strong current uncertainty within the economy has put businesses under continued pressure. This is completely understandable as it seems that these conditions are also prevalent across the county. As a result of these conditions, it has been difficult for the organisers to reach the desired sponsorship targets.

The organisers would like to thank all those who gave their time and commitment to the intended event. The organisers remain committed to meet their obligations in full. We look to reorganise and come back in the future.

For the benefit of all our readers – we are told Cranleigh has a huge venue for concerts and shows – including The Cranleigh Agricultural Show; The Lions Classic Car Show and other events. A tried and tested venue well away from residential properties – it is called ‘The Cranleigh Showground.’

Screen Shot 2019-08-15 at 10.36.29.png

It cannot be true – can it?


Screen Shot 2019-08-07 at 20.26.42


Whilst lazing on our sunbeds – (sorry to all our readers over there in Blustury Blighty because we hear you are having atrocious silly season weather) – but we noticed on the web a little missive from the new ‘Chair’ of Godalming Town Council.

‘Abolition of town councillors robes and restoration of open public speaking at town council sessions.’

We have already posted on the abolition of the mayoral robesThe new brooms getting to grips with Godalming.

However, a subsequent sentence in a message to residents from GTC’s Chair Paul Follows took us by surprise…

‘restoration of open public speaking at town council sessions.’

RESTORATION OF PUBLIC SPEAKING! Really? Are we to gather from that statement that the previous administrators of Godalming Town Council didn’t allow their residents the democratic right to actually speak at town council meetings?  If not, why not? Even in the smallest villages in the borough, the public is given an opportunity to speak, ask questions, make comments, to their elected representatives. Some even call councillors to account. So what in the name of open and transparent government has been going on in Godalming for? years?

Oh well – enough of Waverley matters and back to the beach bar.

Fewer empty homes as ‘Your Waverley’ cracks down on owners.


PLANS to make use of unoccupied housing in Waverley are slowly becoming a reality, according to new statistics.

 The empty homes scandal, which saw 677 homes in Waverley left unoccupied for at least six months has been a headache for the council for years. And, despite its efforts,  the figure only decreased to 615 last year.

 Statistics for 2019 reveal that 22 homes sat empty for ten years or more, compared to  29 recorded in 2018.

However, the value of homes left unoccupied for two years is worth £31 million alone.

Last year ‘Your Waverley’ said it was working to “bring these properties into use and using council tax to deter owners from leaving properties empty.”  Changes made by the government gave council’s the right to charge 50 per cent extra council tax on homes empty over two years.  These changes are now paying off.

Said a council spokesman: “Our private sector housing team works very hard to encourage owners to bring vacant homes back into use, so it is good to see the number of empty properties in the borough falling.”

The decrease in the number of empty homes is attributed to the changes in council tax premiums, with homes empty for more than ten years being charged 300 per cent council tax.

He added:

“The council is also working very hard to increase the amount of affordable housing in the borough, as we currently have 1046 households on our Housing Register.

“We carefully manage our housing and land assets to enable us to invest in high-quality new homes for affordable rent, building 45 in 2018.

“We are also investing in new shared ownership properties and continuously working with developers in order to maximise the number of affordable housing in new developments across the borough.”

Would you Adam and Eve it? Surrey could be backing fracking in our borough!


Perhaps it is not ‘Your Waverley’ that should be listening to the public outcry about oil and gas exploration proposed in Dunsfold – but the Surrey numpties – who could find themselves going the same way as Waverley councillors next year.

Having listened very carefully to residents and groups from Surrey & Sussex, Waverley Council’s new administration has registered its objections:  

Well done’ Your Waverley’s’ first listening exercise was a rollicking success – and there are calls for more

However, it appears that the Surrey numpties who have just declared a climate emerganimated-spider-image-0201ency are speaking with forked tongue. Here’s ‘YW’s Listening Exercise Chairman’s view on the latest missive from his county council colleague – whose kee-jerk response leaves us here at the WW spinning with indignation in our web.

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 20.26.59.png


Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 21.11.30.png

Is it too much to hope that our county councillors will start listening to their constituents? 

Because if they don’t it could home to haunt them sooner than they think!

 As for you Mr Mike Goodman, the electorate might be wiping that smile off your face anytime soon? Because how bloody dare you say: – “although you (WBC) have chosen to consult with the public in this way it is not a formal part of the County’s consultation or decision-making process in respect of this proposal.”

In other words: You will do what you damned well like despite local objection including that of Waverey Borough Council – the democratically elected body with whom you are duty-bound to consult!

Your arrogance is legendary.

Our popular Farnham town centre pub is about to become a…?


Works are underway at the Marlborough Head Pub in Farnham. 

According to Waverley Borough Council, the traditional look of the building is being protected, with the front and side facades to be retained. 


The roof is being removed to be surveyed and will be preserved where possible, while the inside of the building will be reconfigured to create new commercial premises. 


Here’s what it once looked like, when we all enjoyed a drink in the lovely old pub. And the picture below shows what ‘Your Waverley’ did under the previous administration.


Just in case you wondered, Crest Nicholson is still searching for tenants – and according to our moles in CNS’s little holes in Blightwells Yard. There are no more now than there were over a year ago! So the Waverley Web will do its bit for the borough and publicise the vacancies as part of our civic duty.

PS. Sainsbury’s has been there for years and ASK has been going down the Pizza Pan in most towns in the country!

Screen Shot 2019-08-09 at 22.40.48.png




A little bit of help from your friends – at the Waverley Web?


Screen Shot 2019-08-07 at 20.26.42.png

Sad souls, that we are – what better way to while away a few hours on our holiday sunbeds than peruse – The Cranleigh Village Neighbourhood Plan?

Not easy trawling through a very long document on the parish council website with a Mojito in one hand and a chocolate-covered burrito in the other! 

We digress! You really don’t want to know what a lovely time we are having.

Here’s a little something that perhaps villagers should read and inwardly digest.

Screen Shot 2019-08-07 at 20.22.06.png

Screen Shot 2019-08-07 at 20.22.44.png

Screen Shot 2019-08-07 at 20.23.59.png

Screen Shot 2019-08-07 at 20.24.11.png

Perhaps the parish council might consider doing another survey with a question along the lines of:

Do you want the High Street clogged up with even more traffic for an 80-bed private care home and 20 community beds with patients from anywhere in Surrey? Together with a hostel of 26 bedsits for health workers (yes, you guessed,  from anywhere in Surrey?  All on land you once owned?

Sorry, have to finish the drink and mop up the chocolate sauce and bake the other side? Happy holidays to all our readers.

Everything WILL NOT be coming up roses, at Green Farm, Green Lane, Churt.


 Roses and Ranunculus, Delphiniums and Daisies, Lupins and Lilies and an abundance of high-end cut flowers will not be blooming at a budding new business thanks to ‘Your Waverley’s’ planners.


Screen Shot 2019-08-08 at 09.55.30.png

Has been’s.



Screen Shot 2019-08-07 at 16.43.20.png

What might have been! 


The Southern Area Planning committee has REFUSED to allow applicants on land owned by the Countryside Restoration Trust to set up six polytunnels in which to grow flowers on agricultural land in the green belt.

 Seventeen letters of objection from residents and insufficient information from the applicants about the “modest” enterprise was enough to wilt councillors’ enthusiasm for the project.

Although objectors argued the development in the countryside should not be allowed, the applicants argued –

where else would you set up a small-scale agricultural type business other than – in the countryside?

Residents, including neighbours, claimed there would be a loss of their “visual amenities” in other words, their views of the countryside.

Perhaps they should consider themselves fortunate? Most of our views are presently being obliterated by bricks walls, some of them 3-storeys high.

The applicants claim the proposed development was  “modest” and flowers needed the protection of polytunnels to cope with the vagaries of the British climate and every effort had been made to site them as far away as possible from neighbours. Hedges would be planted along with a swathe of wildflowers.

Officers explained the produce would be for local and London florists, florists through a wholesaler visiting once a day and would employ two full-time local people and some casual labour during the flowering season This would produce minimal traffic.

However,  neighbours think differently and listed a host of concerns including the poor access, dangers on Green Lane for cars, pedestrians and horse-riders. The poly-tunnels would cause light pollution (despite the fact there would be no lighting) would reflect sunlight and could attract thieves.

No attempt had been made by the applicant to address their concerns and there was no provision for a workshop, washrooms or toilets. No provision had been made for composting, recycling or general waste. And, no provision for storage of chemicals and fuel.

However, the applicants maintained…

Screen Shot 2019-08-07 at 16.06.33.pngScreen Shot 2019-08-07 at 16.08.13.png

Despite officers supporting the business, they received a few veiled slaps on the wrists for not ensuring Surrey highways provided robust traffic information.

The Waverley Web couldn’t help wondering when did SCC highways ever provide “robust traffic information?”

Officers should not have advised applicants to put in three separate planning applications, each for two poly-tunnels, six in total –  to save the applicant planning fees!  And, for supporting an application with insufficient detailed information. 

Oh dear! Waverley’s CEO is going to get a letter from Cllr Robert Knowless (who thinks he knows more)  asking him why the applicant was advised by officers of ways to save money when Waverley’s planning function was running at a 60% loss!

Ye Gods! Planning Officers trying to give a helping hand to get an embryo local business off the ground – perish the thought!

The scrappy voting procedure on three identical applications, which was almost impossible to hear or understand, was 4 votes in favour, 4 votes against and one abstention so were ALL REFUSED  on Chairman “Oh dear” Beaman’s casting vote.



A little rebranding exercise for a Waverley charity?


CPRE rebrand to focus on the countryside rather than brownfield sites.


A recent press release from the CPRE presented their “eye-catching new look, inspired by the colours and shapes of our countryside”.

CPRE have realised that:

“CPRE can be perceived as negative, and this can put potential supporters off, even if they love the countryside.”

“As a result, you’ll begin to notice a change tone from CPRE, as we focus more on the positive solutions that we have always tried to create. This is underpinned by our new strategic aims – to ‘connect people and countryside’, ‘promote rural life’ and ‘empower communities’ – that your comments helped us develop.”

The Waverley Web wonders if…

Perhaps this will filter down to the Local Group, who can focus on the countryside and the threats to the beautiful Surrey Hills, rather than the borough’s largest Brownfield site, the centre of Waverley’s economic strategy, and now a Garden Village status.



Is a bad deal better than no deal – for the residents of the eastern villages?​


That is the dilemma facing residents of the eastern villages as they face the fact that they are NEVER going to get the new replacement village hospital and day hospital they were promised almost 20 years ago.



The meeting decided with a couple of votes against and one abstention that…

  • A. They want the land held by the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust returned to the parish.
  • B.  They want Waverley Planners to refuse to allow a Care Home to built on parish land – together with a hostel.
  • They want the existing old Cranleigh Hospital and its Day Hospital to be improved – together with a minor injuries unit and other services.

Residents from Alfold, Dunsfold, Ewhurst and Cranleigh learned it was crunch time – with an application for an 80-bed Care Home including 20 community beds and 26 health worker bedsits due to be determined by Waverley Planners in September. The scheme was to have been considered in August. But it was postponed after pressure from councillors. 

Is the ‘Silly Season’ just about to get a whole lot sillier – at ‘Your Waverley.’ UPDATED.

The WW understands that a public meeting was held last Saturday and despite only being given a few days notice a crowd of 50 turned up to the village hall.

A panel headed by Alfold resident Andy Webb announced he had been vilified for daring to hold the meeting at all.

Residents were faced with … an empty chair emblazoned with the name  – CRANLEIGH VILLAGE HOSPITAL TRUST.  As, they heard that for the second time in under six months, it was ‘no show’ by the charity, to answer their urgent questions.

A string of speakers – who we will not name for fear of reprisals – described the 20-year long and complex history of a dream for a replacement new hospital and day hospital in Cranleigh which had now turned into the nightmare of a £14m 60-bed private care home and 20-community beds to benefit  a region much larger than that originally proposed. A development which would include 26 bedsits for care workers from the locality – but which would bring in no community benefit in either Community Infrastructure Levy – or 106 monies to mitigate for the scheme.

Waverley Council’s Deputy leader Paul Follows heard residents including many donors ask…


  • The parish council had taken part in a land exchange with a so-called ‘local benefactor” for a £1 without getting a mandate from villagers first?
  • Why had it exchanged land for £1 which had been valued by the District Valuer for £250,000?
  • Why didn’t the parish council receive Best Value?
  • Why hadn’t the council abided by an agreement with the charity to take the land back, when the project had not taken place after the agreed five years?
  • Why had it agreed to a Ransome strip around a football pitch, which was part of the land swap?
  • Former Cranleigh parish councillor Ken Reed shocked everyone when he revealed that he had not been made aware of such an onerous restriction on the football pitch.

“I was not aware, such a restriction existed, and I would have objected if I had known.” 

Villagers asked…the empty chair where had £1.4m of their money gone?

  • What was the model of care and who would occupy the community beds?
  • Where were the promised Day Hospital and other facilities – including a minor injuries unit and outpatients facilities? Why were villagers faced with something that had morphed into a completely different concept than that they had backed with their cash and voluntary efforts?
  • What lease did the charity have with the private operator – which was heavily in debt (circa £800,000,000) and up for sale?

A former CVHT Trustee Kay Newman attempted to explain the original vision for the project and how numerous changes in the health sector had affected its progression.

Money raised had been used in a variety of ways including the creation of the Bruce Mackenzie football field and changes to the highway in Knowle Lane. Although she was no longer a trustee having resigned almost 10 years ago, she had heard from the solicitor for CVHT that the operator (HC-One) would receive a 150-year lease on the building and would pay £1m towards the hostel block. He had given assurances that if the present operator failed, another would take over. She also assured everyone that the charity would hold a public meeting together with its stakeholder partners – once planning permission was granted. She said although the organisers had asked residents to address their questions to the empty chair, CVHT would make the model of care and other matters clearer once planning permission had been granted.

She apologised to the many donors, for the part she and her husband, the former chairman, for the disappointment of not getting what everyone had originally hoped for, a new Cranleigh Hospital and Day Hospital.

 Ewhurst resident Diane James said from what she had heard the Charity was either guilty of fraud or negligence and asked whether it was possible to seek an injunction to stop the development?

A letter was read out from Rtd GP John Verdon; former nurses spoke of their concerns, and one resident asked why the land appeared in the charity accounts at £2.4m when there was no planning consent, saying we are being misled.

Some believed the 20 community beds were merely a minor replacement for 56 beds lost due to the closure of Longfields a Surrey County Council home now derelict. The Waverley warden-assisted accommodation of 58 flats and seven old people’s bungalows had also been also lost to the community’s elderly.

Everyone agreed, with a few exceptions who believed a bad deal was better than no deal, arguing the 20 beds were needed, that it was now time to look forward not back and that a petition should call for the application to be refused. The land should be returned to the village and every effort should be made to support new and existing services offered by Cranleigh League of Friends at the old cottage hospital.

Others believed the Charity Commission should be contacted as a matter of urgency, as Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust was not giving residents what they had promised.

They said:

“We are getting a raw deal – a valuable asset of this community is being taken over by big business – and if we have to join together to seek legal redress, then let’s all put some money towards doing just that.”






Fancy a bit of a battle in Farnham?


Not the usual battle of the political kind – at least not yet anyway.

You may be able to help with the Farnham Society’s production of the Battle of Moor Park?

Screen Shot 2019-08-04 at 22.46.16.png

They are looking to put on two performances on Sat 14th Sept in situ behind the Shepherd and Flock pub.

Diane Bradbury will be directing along with her daughter who states they are both amateurs but do have experience of directing musicals and plays for a local society.

They need people to take on small speaking parts and just to be crowd members. The production will probably involve the audience to a degree.

If you would like to know any more then please contact Diane Bradbury –

For the uninitiated, the  Siege of Moor Park took place in 1897 when a huge mob turned up at Moor Park Lodge, objecting to the owners of the lodge obstructing a legal right of way across their land.

Historian Rosemary Wisbey has written a script for a 15-minute pantomime style re-enactment of the riots caused after the owners of Moor Park Lodge barred the gates to their estate, and the Farnham Society’s heritage team has secured permission from the present owner of Moor Park Lodge.

The National Trust’s theme for its heritage open days is:

“People Power.”

Something, perhaps that will strike a chord with the townsfolk of Cranleigh and Villages who are about to embark on their own take on  – ‘People Power.’ They have just voted to take their own stand for something they believe passionately about?


An AONB win for Haslemere!



And a win for Haslemere’s Waverley Councillors!

Plans to build 28 homes in the grounds of a Surrey mansion have been blocked by a High Court judge who backed an inspector’s ruling who backed the Waverley Council decision that the scheme’s impact on an area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB) should be given more weight than the council’s lack of a five-year housing land supply.

Developers Monkhill Limited wanted to convert Longdene House, off Hedghog Lane, Haslemere, from 50 – yes 50 offices into a single luxury home. And, in its extensive parkland, the company proposed the demolition of existing cottages, glasshouses and outbuildings to construct 28 homes.

The site has had a rollercoaster ride – In 2016 the scheme was refused by Waverley, granted at Appeal, and then Waverley won a High Court Challenge against the Appeal, much to the disgust of wealthy landowner Tony Lawson.
In 2018 the developers were back – Waverley officers recommend it for Planning (the site was in the draft LPP2 after all) but was voted down 12 to 8. It was proposed by Cllr Mulliner, and seconded by Cllr Inchbald, that permission be refused on the grounds of material harm to the intrinsic character, beauty and openness of the Countryside beyond the Green Belt, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value. Additionally, there were reasons relating to the failure of the applicant to complete a Section 106 agreement to secure agreed contributions. [Meeting minutes] This was brave especially as Waverley had over-ridden the AONB designation on the sloping hill behind Longdene at nearby Sturt Farm.

In the latest appeal decision, the inspector accepted that there was a “significant shortfall” in the available supply of housing land in the area. Waverley only had enough housing sites to last a maximum of 4.6 years, as against the five-year requirement set by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). He said the development would make a “significant contribution” to meeting local housing needs, including the provision of 10 affordable homes.

The decisive factor, however, was that most of the site lies within the Surrey Hills AONB.

The inspector said the project would have “a significant adverse effect on the character and appearance” of the protected area. Despite some benefits to the local economy, it would “not conserve or enhance the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB”.

Challenging the inspector’s decision, Monkhill argued that he had misinterpreted and misapplied parts of the NPPF. Due to the council’s failure to meet the five-year housing land target, a “tilted balance” applied in favour of the development.

Dismissing the appeal however, Mr Justice Holgate said the inspector’s exercise of his planning judgment could not be faulted. Monkhill’s complaints were “too legalistic and failed to interpret the NPPF in a practical, straightforward way, capable of being operated by decision-makers up and down the country”.

The NPPF, the judge added, gives AONBs “the highest status of protection” and the inspector was right to give “great weight” to the preservation of the character and appearance of the Surrey Hills. The inspector struck “a simple planning balance” between the benefits of the scheme and the harm it would cause to the landscape and scenic beauty of the area.

Villagers reminisce about those heady days when they raised money to build a new hospital in Cranleigh.


Villagers over there in the east of the borough have been on a 20-year walk down memory lane and have sent us this list of some of the fundraising events they enjoyed during the late 1990s and the years since. Might be worth casting your minds back before you attend the public meeting tomorrow Saturday.  


Cranleigh Village Hospital

Cranleigh Village Hospital has been at the heart of the local community for almost 150 years. It earned its place in history as the first cottage hospital in the country when a local rector and a local doctor founded it in 1859.

Throughout its sometimes-turbulent history, its reputation for caring has been jealously guarded, and local people have fought off numerous attempts to close its doors.

Although the 15th-century cottage forms the nucleus of the hospital there were alterations and extensions in 1901, 1922 and 1936.

In the 70’s it teetered on the edge of closure and villagers embarked on a David and Goliath fight, which it won after it was taken to Westminster. The League of Friends subsequently raised over

£50,000 towards a Day Hospital extension. An Outpatients Department was added in 1987 and another £35,000 was raised for day rooms.

In 1998 with South West Surrey Health Authority facing rising debts the hospitals future was again in the balance. The community warned it would not sit idly by and watch it close, and health officials agreed it could stay if it met modern standards.

In 2001 Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust was formed and following an offer of land from a local benefactor it was agreed to build a new hospital and health centre.

When the Trust, led by Cranleigh’s Head of Practice Dr Robin Fawkner-Corbett took on the huge task of raising £2m, it decided the hospital would never again face the axe. This time the Trust would own the hospital on behalf of the community with the NHS providing the services.

The community has shown how much it cares for the hospital down the years. Now we are asking, once again, for everyone to demonstrate their commitment for a new hospital with the same traditions to serve future generations.


Cranleigh and South Eastern Agricultural Society’s annual Show at Parkhouse Farm, Cranleigh. All-day Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust will be represented, visit the marquee. A heavy horse-drawn wagon will also tour the showground allowing visitors to pat the horses and pick up a money pot. The Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust marquee will be situated next to the member’s tent. Please visit.


CSEAS Wine Tasting. Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust Marquee between 7.30pm and 9.30pm – Taurus Wines.


Join the Biggest Dinner Party in the World. An opportunity to invite guests to your home at £20 a head for a meal of your choice. Could be a candlelit dinner, a fish and chip supper, or a takeaway. One villager is holding a beach party as they will be on holiday in Portugal. Just let us know the event

is taking place so we can count you in, and send some information, then enjoy yourselves and send Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust the proceeds.

So far 37 people have promised to host an event as part of the trust’s “Largest Dinner Party in the World” attempt.

For more information ring Michael Allbrook on 01483 277086


Cranleigh Bonfire Night – The Common, Cranleigh. More information to be announced nearer the date.


Cranleigh hairdresser Roy Redford takes part in the New York Marathon on behalf of Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust. Roy has run thousands of miles for charity and has raised many hundreds of thousands of pounds. Please make his run worthwhile by sponsoring him.


Concert and Supper organised by Cranleigh’s Inner Wheel. For more information ring Jean Quallington on 01483 273361


Cranleigh Methodist church will be holding a concert with a choir and youth band at 8pm. For more information ring Geoff King on 01483 273420


The Trust has applied for permission from Waverley Borough Council to hold a street collection on Thursday morning November 28th from 08.00 to 13.00 and Saturday 30th November 09.00 until 16.00. It hopes to repeat the exercise again in 2003.

Next year the community will be asked to “walk that extra mile” in aid of Cranleigh’s new hospital.


Once planning permission has been obtained the Trust’s fund-raising arm will launch a buy a brick campaign.

A Rock and Jazz Festival for all the family will be held on Sunday 27th July at the Cranleigh Showground from noon until 8 pm. It follows on from a very successful event held last year when more than 400 people enjoyed 8 hours of live music at the Little Park Hatch pub in Cranleigh.

Organiser Jimmy Beecroft is determined to make the festival bigger and better this year, so has moved the event to the showground just a week before the annual Cranleigh Show. The new venue and timing allows the festival to make use of marquees, toilets and other facilities. Up to

1,000 people can now attend and the marquees will enable the event to take place whatever the weather!

Seven of the best local “Rock and Jazz” bands will include Sticky Bun, Replay, Harmonia, More, Serendipity, and Jimmy’s own band with Jazziz.

They will play from a specially erected stage in a natural amphitheatre at the southern end of the showground. This stage will overlook a big grass auditorium in which the audience can sit out and enjoy the music & sun. There will be beer, wine and light refreshments in the main marquee, activities for children, and ample parking in the main showground car-park.

Use of the show facilities has significantly reduced the costs of staging the event. Said Jimmy: “We are enormously grateful to the Cranleigh and South Eastern Agricultural Society and we will take good care of the facilities prior to the annual show. We intend to make this a truly memorable event”.

CVHT fundraiser and coordinator, Simon Goldsmith said ” Jimmy has been fantastic at pulling together a huge network of volunteer musicians, suppliers and other helpers for this Festival. It promises to be a great day for everyone.”

Tickets available in advance at £5 for adults and over 12’s (under 12’s free) from the Hospital Shop and Awareness Centre at Oliver House in Cranleigh High Street or directly from Jimmy Beecroft. “Rock & Jazz Festival 2003” tee shirts are available for £10.

The CVHT will be joining to other local charities for a Gala Concert next month.

Every ticket sold for the event at Guildford Cathedral on Saturday November 8th.will help save lives. That is the message from Haste, Macmillan Cancer Relief and the Cranleigh Hospital Trust.

Some of the country’s finest soloists will be taking part – they include International soprano Kathryn Harries; Clare Weston, rising star of the English National Opera; Robert Poulton and Paul Nilon, international baritone and tenor, together with choir Vox Angelia.

Instrumentalists appearing are Heather Tomola (recorder), Angela Livingstone (piano) and the Cranleigh Brass Quintet.

Margaret Howard the well-known broadcaster will present the programme and she and Jill Phillips will give entertaining readings.

Some of the performers will be well known to the audiences of the Coverwood Concerts held in the Surrey Hills at Ewhurst each year, and which attract music lovers from all over the country.

“The three charities have joined forces as an experiment for this fantastic event because what they all have in common is an aim to improve the life of local people.” We believe charities are all looking for the same pound, and we believe by working together we can help each other,” said a spokesman.

Tickets are now on sale from The Three Charities Concert, Wintershall Estate Office, Wintershall, Bramley, Surrey. GU50LR or by telephoning 01483 892167 Reserved seats which are selling fast are £20, unreserved seats £10 and senior and student concessions unreserved are £7.50.

The 70th anniversary Charity Concert at Birtley House, Bramley promises to be an event not to be missed.

Entitled “Turning Back the Years – 1932 Cavalcade” the event will feature the Tin Pan Alley Orchestra directed by Nick Barnard with soloist Jan Hartley.

The directors of Eyhurst Court Ltd are inviting supporters of the Cranleigh Village Hospital Appeal to celebrate its 70th Anniversary of the registration of the Birtley House Nursing Home in 1932. The beautiful grounds of the home off the A281 Horsham Road will be opened for the concert at 7.30pm on Wednesday, July 3rd July 2002.

The proceeds will be shared between the Macmillan Cancer Relief Fund, The Royal Marsden Hospital, the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust and Holy Trinity Church, Bramley.

You are invited to take along a picnic and the gardens around the lake will be open from 6pm. 1930’s dress is optional. Tickets (advance booking only) £30 each from The Secretary, Birtley House, Bramley, Guildford, Surrey. GU5OLB Tel: 01483 892055.

24/06/02 – 06/07/02
Catherine Hamilton’s Art Exhibition read more >

29/06/02 Cranleigh Carnival

read more >
Open Garden and Model Railway

read more >
70th anniversary Charity Concert read more >
Travel Presentation

read more >
Table Top Sale
read more >
Alfold Sports Day
read more >
Cranleigh Rectory Fete read more >

Barbecue and Bands read more > 20/07/02
Charity Car Wash read more > 26/07/02

Teddy Bear’s Picnic read more > 11/05/03 Sponsored walk read more> 16/05/03

Dinner at Loseley House

01/06/ 03
A successful Bric-a-Brac Sale at the Hospital Shop raised £400


Big Big Concert. All the old local 60’s bands will be back in harness once more at the Guildford Civic Hall in aid of Cranleigh CVHT and St Christopher’s. 1,200 seats.

26/05/03 (Sat)
Disco for children and disabled children in the village hall. 5.30-7.15 and 7.30 – 9.30

Barn Dance on The Cranleigh Showground
read more >
21/06/03 and 22/06/03
Ewhurst Secret Gardens were opened to the public

28/06/03 Lions Fair

Medieval Banquet

A Medieval Banquet held at the Cranleigh Golf and Leisure Club proved to be a huge success and raised £1,038. 59.

House of Lords

The Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust was guest of our Patron The Baroness Sharp of Guildford in April – and a good time was had by all.

read more >
Ewhurst Secret Gardens
Over the weekend June 21/22 Ewhurst Secret Gardens were opened to the public.

Children’s Supper disco

Special End of term Supper disco was held on Saturday 26th July at Cranleigh Village Hall. Children of all ages attended from 5 to 12. They were entertained by the disco and at their supper with their friends. A good time had by all.

Celebrity Cricket Match

Bunbury Celebrity Cricket Match on Cranleigh Cricket Common Sunday July 6th for the CVHT and the English Schools Cricket Association.

A free day out for all – but a collection was taken. Celebrities were there in their droves, great for autograph hunters.

read more >
Clay Pigeon Shooting

Clay pigeon shots set their sights on boosting the fund-raising for Cranleigh hospital when they took part in a Charity Clay Pigeon Shoot at Peter Nutting’s estate at North Breache Manor, Ewhurst and raised £4,664.

read more > “Billy No Mates”

are a hard-working four-piece band specialising in up-tempo rock covers designed to get everyone dancing?

They comprise:
Tristan Lambeth – vocals and rhythm guitar Darren Wingate – lead guitar
Alan Wise – bass guitar and backing vocals John Hiles – drums
website: –

This concert was a great success and raised £563.

Peter Donohoe concert at Cranleigh School

The Project to build a new hospital in Cranleigh is to be given the Royal touch. Their Highnesses the Earl and Countess of Wessex have agreed to attend a Charity Concert in aid of UKCCSG – the Oliver Davis Support Group and Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust.

A Piano recital by Peter Donohoe, one of the foremost pianists in the country, was held at Cranleigh School’s Speech Hall on Wednesday 10th September at 7.30 p.m.

Musicians from the Massed Cadet Bands from Surrey, Berkshire, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, The Surrey ACF Corps of Drums, Surrey Pipe Band, Cranleigh Choral Society and Choristers from the Cranfold Area will take part in a Christmas Spectacular Concert.

The event on Saturday 6th December will be held in the Cranleigh School Chapel at 6.30 p.m. and will be in aid of the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust.

The special guest with will be Kathryn Harries and the Compere is Alan Smith.

Tickets can be obtained from the CVHT shop at Oliver House in Cranleigh High Street or from Nicholas North on 542062 or from the Handyman’s Store in Cranleigh High Street.

Villagers had a wicket day out when the celebrities piled into Cranleigh for the Bunbury celebrity cricket match on July 6th.

Cranleigh Select X1 played the star-studded Bunburys in aid of Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust and the English Schools Cricket Associaton. This historic match on Cranleigh Cricket common included:

Trevor Gripper – Zimbabwean Test Match Cricketer Neil Lenham – Sussex Cricket Club
Alan Butcher – Surrey and Glamorgan CCC
Jamie Theakston – TV Presenter

Lloyd Hunnigan – Heavyweight boxing champion Rob Duncan – From ” Drop the dead donkey” Mark Austin – ITN News Reader
Alan Igglesden – Ex England and Kent Cricketer.

There was an opportunity for people to meet and watch their favourite cricket and celebrity heroes. Other attractions included a beer tent, an auction, sporting memorabilia and a barbecue. A marquee housed corporate and private hospitality.

The event was free but there was a collection on behalf of the chosen charities.

Clay pigeon shots set their sights on boosting the fund-raising for Cranleigh hospital when they took part in a Charity Clay Pigeon Shoot at Peter Nutting’s estate at North Breache Manor, Ewhurst and raised £4,664.

The event attracted 28 teams of four guns from all over the South of England for a 60 bird-sporting shoot and a 100-bird team flush. After tucking into a bacon roll breakfast provided by Cranleigh Lions teams and spectators enjoyed a good morning shooting in pleasant conditions. Afterwards, around 150 people enjoyed a hog roast lunch in a marquee provided completely free of charge by Jonathan Graham Brown of Manorhouse Hill Farm, Shillinglee. There was also be a pool shoot and a popular novice instruction stand collecting five-pound a head for some first-class instruction from a Cowdray Estate shot. The charity auction, with auctioneer Peter Nutting, raised over £1,800 with good prices obtained for such donated items as shooting lessons at Bisley, a Purdie shooting jacket, a four-wheel-drive instruction course and many more.

The fund-raising chairman of Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust Poppity Nutting thanked everyone who had donated items, and to Jonathan Graham Brown for providing the marquee for “another wonderful fund-raising event.”

She handed over the Jim McAllister trophy to the winning team The Pink Willie pictured here from left to right who scored 258 points. Colin McKenna, Garreth Jones, Jess Allinson and Michael Boud with Poppity Nutting. The Loose Cannons won the voucher for the Boobies. Peter Bone, Stephen Getting, Adrian Crafts and John Palczynski.

Organiser a Cranleigh Village Hospital manager, Jackie Stockill thanked everyone who had taken part and said the event would be repeated next year.

The Trust was in evidence on July 13th at Cranleigh Rectory Fete, when hundreds of visitors took the opportunity to learn more about the appeal. Many left clutching a logo topped money jar, the odd teddy, and the inspiration to do their own fund-raising events in the future.

On Saturday evening 13 th March CVHT will be joining forces with the Cuthbert Mayne School for an auction with over 150 lots – and more are still pouring in.

In addition to silverware, jewellery, furniture, antiques, glass, paintings, cartoons, china and glass. There are promises including Holiday flats/apartments/cottages in Tenerife on a golf course in the Canary Islands, Scotland, Devon and Norfolk.

CVHT patrons Eric Clapton and Ringo Starr have sent along with memorabilia and there are promises galore.

Viewing at Cranleigh Village Hall is from 5pm-9pm on Friday 12th and on Saturday 10am until 4pm and 6.30 to 7.30pm.

The auction starts at 7.30pm programmes are £1 and there is a licensed bar and nibbles.

< return to events

A Sugar Plum Fairy, a Tasty Tiger and Spiderman put on a happy face on behalf of Cranleigh Village Hospital and raised hundreds of pounds. Alias Dr Robin Fawkner-Corbett, Cranleigh & South Eastern Agricultural Society vice President Carolyn Townsend and President Nick Vrijland went under the artist, Jackie Stockill’s, brush all in a good cause at Cranleigh Show.

CVHT raised more than £2,000 in the Trust marquee with the help of Cranleigh Hospital and Cranleigh Health Centre staff. Fundraiser Jo Berry’s daughters, Kayleigh and Georgia, raised £52.86p on their handmade jewellery.

Said Trust chairman: “We did a number of things, we raised money, we raised awareness of the project and we all had a thoroughly enjoyable day.”

Castle Nursery School, Shamley Green will be holding a Teddy Bear’s Picnic in aid of Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust on July 26th. All you need is a teddy and a picnic, and of course a child.

Cranleigh bonfire organised by Cranleigh Lions for CVHT was a roaring success.

Julie Walters a Cranleigh CVHT patron was a hit with the huge crowd, when fresh from her Calendar girls hit film she dropped in to set light to the bonfire.

It was the first time Julie has attended the bonfire though her husband Grant and daughter Maisie are regulars. Another Cranleigh CVHT patron Ringo Starr and his wife Barbara Bach took along former model Patti Boyd and a good time was had by all.

Roads around the bonfire were closed off for the celebrations to allow a massive torchlight procession to make its way from Park Mead to The Common. Members of the Lions and CVHT were out in force with their buckets collecting money. The amount raised will be announced later.

It is anticipated that the Bunbury team will include most of the following:

David English (Legend!) – Captain *

Alec Stewart (Surrey & England) – Umpire

Andrew Flintoff (Lancs & England) *

Rob Key (Kent & England) *

Mark Butcher (Surrey & England) *

Adam Hollioake (Surrey & England) *

Robin Smith (Hants & England)

Mark Austin (ITN News) *

Steve Bennett (Premiership Referee) *

Fraser Hinds (Emmerdale)

Lloyd Honeyghan (Boxer)

Gary Mason (Boxer)

Jamie Theakston (Actor & TV Presenter)

Andy Jacobs (Talk Sport Radio)

* Confirmed as of 20 August

CVHT OPS: Dr Robin Corbett talks with Jimmy Beecroft who was the organiser and one of the acts to help raise money at the Little Park Hatch last Sunday, all proceeds went to the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust.

By popping into the shop and awareness centre you can pick up a money pot kindly donated by Gordons Fine Foods of Littlemead Industrial Estate, Cranleigh. Just fill it with your loose change. By filling in the Gift Aid as well, the appeal will receive even more money.

There will be a Ho-Down of the never to be forgotten variety when Cranleigh village hospital Trust fund-raisers stage a Family Barn Dance in June.

The impressive 78-acre Cranleigh showground at Parkhouse Farm will be the venue for an event that has been masterminded by Michael Allbrook. He has persuaded the Cranleigh & South Eastern Agricultural Society to let the Trust use the huge Dutch barn off Barhatch Lane for a family barn dance that promises to be a winner.

The well-known Malthouse Band with caller Don Nunneley will entertain 200 guests on June 7th.

In addition to an opportunity to dozey do with the best of the guests will be treated to a hog roast provided by Tony Kilfeather. There will be real ale and wine on sale through Taurus Wines, who regularly support the Trust, as well as plenty of soft drinks.

The Trust has already contacted everyone living around the site, to ensure they are not upset or disturbed by noise from the event, and so far they have agreed to put up with any inconvenience and wished the Trust well.

Tickets are available at £6 from the Hospital Shop and Awareness Centre at Oliver House in Cranleigh High Street.

If you would like to volunteer to help the fund-raising team, please contact the Trust Administrator Mrs Christina Pearce on 01483 276121.

The Cranleigh Bonfire was held on Saturday 2nd November. Despite the continual rain throughout the day, the event was a great success.

All of the usual attractions, of a Guy Competition for local junior school pupils and the torch-lit procession, accompanied by a marching band, a further band in Stocklund Square, a pig-roast, hot food, a beer tent and, of course, a huge bonfire with a stunning firework display provided by Lionel Couzens-Smith and his team from Payne’s Fireworks; were not spoilt by the weather. Our guests of honour were Ringo and Barbara Starr. To the obvious delight of the crowd, Ringo helped to place the Guy on the top of the bonfire, before applying the first torch.

All of the profits from this year’s event are to be donated by the Lions to the Cranleigh Village Hospital appeal. Prior to starting the display of fireworks, Ringo encouraged the large crowd to give generously and spoke of his admiration for the excellent work carried out by Cranleigh Lions within the local community. As a Club, we should like to offer our thanks to Ringo and Barbara as well as to all of our other sponsors who helped to make such a damp night such a roaring success.

Thanks to all our sponsors

Repaircraft; Cranfold Computer Services; Grahams of Cranleigh; Gordon Thomas; Edward Cross; Madestein; Carolyn Lodge; Cranfold Physical Therapy; Roland Tysoe; P & P Glass; Roston; Tickners; Manns of Cranleigh; Vic Simmons; Keith Payne; The Cranleigh Exhaust Centre; Alan Spriggs; Centriplant; Smithbrook Lighting; Pages; The Wintershall Charitable Trust; County Tiles; Marshall’s; Cranleigh Car Clinic;

Waverley Gas and Tool Hire; Stennett’s. and Cranleigh Lions.

Burns & Webber sponsored the Guy Competition and the Surrey Advertiser the Photographic Competition. Other sponsors included Roger N Coupe, Cranleigh Freight and Dick Lane Services,

and others who wish to remain anonymous.


Cranleigh and South Eastern Agricultural Society’s annual Show at Parkhouse Farm, Cranleigh. All-day Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust will be represented, visit the marquee. A heavy horse-drawn wagon will also tour the showground allowing visitors to pat the horses and pick up a money pot. The Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust marquee will be situated next to the member’s tent. Please visit.


CSEAS Wine Tasting. Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust Marquee between 7.30pm and 9.30pm – Taurus Wines.


Join the Biggest Dinner Party in the World. An opportunity to invite guests to your home at £20 a head for a meal of your choice. Could be a candlelit dinner, a fish and chip supper, or a takeaway. One villager is holding a beach party as they will be on holiday in Portugal. Just let us know the event is taking place so we can count you in, and send some information, then enjoy yourselves and send Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust the proceeds.

So far 37 people have promised to host an event as part of the trust’s “Largest Dinner Party in the World” attempt.

For more information ring Michael Allbrook on 01483 277086


Cranleigh Bonfire Night – The Common, Cranleigh. More information to be announced nearer the date.


Cranleigh hairdresser Roy Redford takes part in the New York Marathon on behalf of Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust. Roy has run thousands of miles for charity and has raised many hundreds of thousands of pounds. Please make his run worthwhile by sponsoring him.


Concert and Supper organised by Cranleigh’s Inner Wheel. For more information ring Jean Quallington on 01483 273361


Cranleigh Methodist church will be holding a concert with a choir and youth band at 8pm. For more information ring Geoff King on 01483 273420


The Trust has applied for permission from Waverley Borough Council to hold a street collection on Thursday morning November 28th from 08.00 to 13.00 and Saturday 30th November 09.00 until 16.00. It hopes to repeat the exercise again in 2003.

Next year the community will be asked to “walk that extra mile” in aid of Cranleigh’s new hospital.


Once planning permission has been obtained the Trust’s fund-raising arm will launch a buy a brick campaign.

The Project to build a new hospital in Cranleigh is to be given the Royal touch. Their Highnesses

the Earl and Countess of Wessex have agreed to attend a Charity Concert in aid of UKCCSG – the

Oliver Davis Support Group and Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust.

A Piano recital by Peter Donohoe, one of the foremost pianists in the country, is to be held at

Cranleigh School’s Speech Hall on Wednesday 10th September at 7.30 p.m. Tickets are selling fast

and former parish councillor and Oliver’s grandmother Vera Davis hopes the event will be a good

fund-raiser for the two charities closest to her heart.

Vera’s seven-year-old grandson Oliver his parents and three sisters will be travelling from their

Wiltshire home to attend at least part of the event where they will meet the Royal couple.

The concert by the pianist who has developed a distinguished career since winning the

International Tchaikovsky Competion in Moscow, travelling all over Europe and America, is

expected to entertain an audience of around 400. He has also recorded his music for EMI and is a

regular at the BBC Promenade Concerts.

The group was formed in 1998 when Oliver was diagnosed with a rare kidney tumour. Following

surgery and chemotherapy he is now a healthy little boy had just completed his second year at


Now the group supports other children suffering from cancer. His grandmother will be at the event

along with Trustees of CVHT.

Tickets can be obtained from the CVHT Hospital Shop at Oliver House in Cranleigh High Street or

from Vera Davies on 01403 822815.

The Trust was in evidence on July 13th at Cranleigh Rectory Fete, when hundreds of visitors took

the opportunity to learn more about the appeal. Many left clutching a logo topped money jar, the

odd teddy, and the inspiration to do their own fund-raising events in the future.

Approx 61 major events.

Go shopping in Farnham – forget it.


The WW left the keyboard behind in the mistaken belief that we could enjoy a bit of retail therapy in the town on Wednesday. We might just have well have planned a mission to the moon. What did we buy – Zilch!

The traffic queues stretched for miles in every direction, we sat, we pondered, we turned up the air conditioning to maximum and then… we fumed. What the hell? We couldn’t turn around – so we put our head in our hands like everyone else! Then gave up and went home.Screen Shot 2019-08-02 at 10.16.41.png

 And then we saw this!

Screen Shot 2019-08-02 at 10.15.32.png

Screen Shot 2019-08-02 at 10.15.16.png

They have to be joking – we will all be on the road to nowhere soon?

Screen Shot 2019-08-02 at 10.17.56.png

Is this the final countdown for Cranleigh’s Private Care Home?


Or will the public meeting called by villagers from Cranleigh & Alfold only a week ago be a big damp squib?

 The event is to be held on the busiest holiday week of the calendar, so will it be ‘no show’ by residents and the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust? 



The media frenzy over Cranleigh’s proposed new Care Home continues unabated?

The new brooms getting to grips with Godalming.


They say a day is a long time in politics – in Godalming things are moving by the hour.

Perhaps this really progressive new council will be a model for others?  Is this the man to follow?

Since the new brooms led by Paul Follow swept into the town’s council chamber in May it has:


  •  Declared a climate emergency. 


  • -Allocated initial money to schemes to support that work this year;


  • – Added a new grant fund for carbon-reducing projects to replace that from 2020;


  • – Used some of this year’s initial money to give the green-light for three public water points at key areas of the town in Godalming, Farncombe and at the Phillips Memorial Park;


  • – A couple of other projects too (one involving some land at Ockford Ridge becoming a wildflower meadow for the community and another regarding the transition to LED bulbs);

Screen Shot 2018-04-02 at 22.28.11

  •  Upon being told that councillors robes would cost in excess of £10,000 to replace. The Town Council has elected not to!

Said Council chair Paul Follows:

“My own personal view here is that I want to be judged, and want the council to be judged on what we do and not what we wear and want to reduce any barriers between councillors and residents.

Tradition is important and this is part of our history but it should not override all other considerations.”

We also agreed on a Town council level structure of regular surgeries where at least one councillor from each ward will be available at each session to meet residents. More details on that soon.

So in my view a very good result – and I am extremely proud to be leading a reforming, modernising and cross-party town council. Many thanks to all the hard work of the town staff on all of the above too – without them, none of these measures would get off the drawing board.

Thank you also to all the residents who attended the recent meeting.🙂 Happy to discuss anything on the above either here or at…/0.-25-July-2019-Full-Council-…



Is another rainbow coalition on its way? This time to Woking?


The first 100 days of Waverley’s coalition has now been completed – and some changes have already been implemented – (The Listening Exercise) and there are many more to come.

So far the opposition has had a few major gripes, such as accusing the new administration of not appointing council members quickly enough to outside bodies – of which there are many. To which Leader John Ward said the Executive wanted to get the right people, with the right skills, into the new roles.

It also accused them of raising the public’s expectation by suggesting residents could have a bigger say in decision-making particularly on planning matters. 

Well done’Your Waverley’s’ first listening exercise was a rollicking success – and there are calls for more.

If that is all the opposition group has to complain about it augers well for the early days of the council, with more new councillors of various colours than ever before.

So Waverley’s new brooms seem to be having less of a problem than those in our neighbouring borough’s of Woking and Guildford.

You can read it here:

The media frenzy over Cranleigh’s proposed new Care Home continues unabated?


Will villagers throw a spanner into a charity’s’ works on August 3rd? Or will there be another no show?Screen Shot 2019-07-27 at 09.56.55.png

The WW has been accused by some of the Bamford Board Brigade (BBB’s) of telling lies and inciting hatred.

Screen Shot 2019-07-27 at 09.16.58.png



Now, it isn’t often our team of bloggers have a hissy fit – but on this occasion – as we have said to the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust –




What’s it all about BB have we pooped on your stoop? You’re having a laugh aren’t you Pot? Kettle? Black?

All those poorer souls from Cranleigh and the nearby villages who dug deep into their pockets to raise over £1m want answers from the charity that trousered it.  Honest answers. And social media keyboards have sizzled with incriminations. on your former self/developer/ propaganda board – the control of which you have now relinquished. 

 All villagers want to know is why they are getting an 80 private care home beds circa (1,200/300 per week and 20 community beds for Surrey County Council’s clients (circa £800 p.w. for dementia clients) a hostel for Surrey health workers and not the HOSPITAL, DAY HOSPITAL with a minor injuries unit and other services, that they were promised?

The WW accepts we are anonymous and our reasons are simple:

We are not hiding behind it, but sometimes you have to be invisible and be in all the right places to get the truth in this ever more devious world.

  • We receive information from officers/councillors and residents eager to shine a light on all things, Waverley.   They trust us to tell you – what you need to know. Nobody funds us? We have nothing to gain?
  • The WW recognises we are Western-centric but have received many hundreds of private e-mails and public comments from residents of the eastern villages who believe they have been well and truly stuffed by a Charity.
  • The WW was prompted to publicise the hospital/care home saga by “local people, In fact, until we heard about residents’ angst, we knew nothing of this 20-year saga.
  • WW does not ask, promote, or suggest that anyone reads this blog. However, it is read here and all over the world.
  • For the first time since its foundation – now every political party; including Conservatives regularly read and comment on our posts.

We have received a Facebook trail of comments from the Cranleigh Community Board – run by the BB – who claims we are run by developers. Well BB – it takes one to know one?

And.. we will have a sporting sixpence bet with you BB when you say we are supported by developers. Name them? And within 24 hours of rising to our challenge, you will be on the receiving end of a solicitors’ letter!

Our offices are not provided/rented from a local developer; we are not Trustees working on behalf of a local developer – and we did not set up a local board to promote any developer’s agenda? Simples.

  1. So we ask – what lies has the WW told Mr Bamford?
  2. If we have lied or misinformed anyone – tell us do? Or perhaps your Mummy will tell us for you? And then we pledge to correct our so-called mistakes.

So let’s do a FACT CHECK and attempt to help BB untwist his super-hero spandex.

Whatever good intentions The Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust may once have had – the road to ruin is paved with good intentions?


Why did thousands of men, women and children support one of the biggest fund-raising initiatives the eastern villages had ever seen?


Because they were told it was for a replacement Cranleigh hospital with beds for residents within a 5-mile radius, on a new site owned by villagers via their partners (Cranleigh Parish Council.) This hospital, they were told, would include a day hospital for outpatients,  minor injuries; X-Ray unit and diagnostics and MRI.  

Screen Shot 2019-07-29 at 09.25.10.png FACT

Cranleigh once boasted a Surrey County Council Dementia Residential Nursing Home – called Longfields – 65+ beds. We had one here in Farnham called Cobgates. Both abandoned, closed and left to rot. One is now derelict.  One Cranleigh organisation told us that villagers raised funds to build a dementia garden there! –

– more villagers’ money down the pan?

So where are 20 of those 120 or so former county council elderly care beds going? Yes, you guessed – just 20 of them into the new private Care Home operated by HC-One, currently FOR SALE and with debts of £800m! All was revealed recently in the Daily Mail.


For whom are the 20 community beds intended? The residents of Surrey. As one villager commented…


“You have as much chance of winning the lottery as you have of jumping into a CVHT bed?”

So Who Dares Wins? SCC? Who gets to flog off a valuable site which should be used to meet the real needs of adult social care.  Not trouser the money to push into a gold-plated pension pot instead of building – a proper residential care facility to serve the rapidly increasing population of Cranleigh and villages? An increase of over 6,000 when you include Dunsfold Park?

However, who wouldn’t grab beds heavily subsidised by the public, a parish council and the future care home’s paying residents’ purses?

Questions you could answer Mr Bamford, as we understand, as you have a direct conduit through the Chamber of Commerce and as a Trustee of the Knowle Park Initiative /A2 Dominion into the developer?


How long is ‘the bed contract’ with SCC? A year? Five years?


What was the District Valuer’s valuation on the land sold to CVHT  by the parish council for £1? 


What exactly is the ‘community benefit?’ Whose ‘community?’


How much Community Infrastructure Levy will it contribute towards infrastructure for such a large development?  

Will, the developer hand over 106 monies or Community Infrastructure Levy to mitigate for the upheaval, increased traffic, noise and inconvenience to Waverley tenants of a three-storey building owned by ‘Your Waverley” and a 26-bed hostel unit – that is actually a housing development in all but name in Whisper Drive?

 We suspect – ZILCH?


Would anyone support a scheme that has no value or benefit to the people who helped fund it?

Answer these questions Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust aka Martin Bamford – to the satisfaction of your donors and then you may get residents’ backing?

Rock up to a public meeting open to everyone, at Cranleigh Village hall on Saturday, August 3rd between 10-12 and have your say. Because the Deputy Leader of Waverley Borough Council will be there to hear you.

Has Cranleigh Parish Council thrown a spanner in the works of a charity’s efforts to build a private nursing home on land once owned by villagers?

As far as we can ascertain – the parish council (a partner of CVHT) has received no response to its solicitor’s letters concerning the covenant it imposed on the land.








Managing the change – for a better Waverley.


As there is so much controversy over the membership of ‘Your Waverley’s’ Executive.

Screen Shot 2019-05-08 at 14.26.36.png

 Once new councillors have signed their Declarations of Office, they must nominate a new Leader, a New Deputy and Mayor. All of whom are now in post and cracking on with the jobs in hand – but apparently not fast enough for the ousted Tories.

A huge and important task faced one of the largest numbers of new councillors ‘YW’  has ever seen. To chose the Executive – where major issues are first debated and then scrutinised by the Overview & Scrutiny Committees and the roles of Portfolio Holders.

A  new council made up of every political party (except Tories) and an Independent recognised very early on they needed to learn from the mistakes made by the previous regime. Engage more with the public, listen more and communicate more effectively.  By the way, the Tories were offered a place on the Executive but refused! Got it? REFUSED!

Although all the parties have formed a Coalition, the Conservative group of 23 councillors still remain the largest party and will be judged by their actions on how they treat the new incumbents, who have been duly elected.

The skills and abilities of individuals, from whichever party need to be recognised as chairmen, portfolio holders etc. A  team of all the talents from across the political spectrum.

It also needs to be recognised that the number one task is to represent the interests of Waverley residents in the towns and villages. We (WW) believe the views of the towns and parishes should carry greater weight, on planning matters in particular. So should the views of the councillors who represent the areas in which development is planned.

Is it fair for example that if all councillors in one area vote against an application they can be outvoted by councillors in other areas with different agendas and priorities?

Thankfully the Listening Exercise has already taken root – See here: Well done’Your Waverley’s’ first listening exercise was a rollicking success – and there are calls for more.

There is also a pressing need to get rid of poor quality staff especially those who think quantity is far more important than quality. Shun the sometimes vomit-inducing tendency of thanking officers at every opportunity just for doing their job, often, not even particularly well. Throw out developers/turned planning officers who are there to help their colleagues?

There are many areas that need attention, the planning portal for one, which is almost impossible for professionals to navigate let alone the layperson.  Our bete noir, the webcasting system, that works for some of the people all of the time, and some people none of the time, but never all of the people all the time. Send it back to Rumbelows?

Treat one another with respect. Turn up, and stay awake, and at least look as though you have read your papers. It was so obvious at the shambolic second meeting of Full Council that many hadn’t! There were numerous mistakes in the paperwork!

Stop pretending that homes costing upwards of £400,000 are “affordable homes” find another name for them, and build council houses that are affordable based on average shop/farm/worker salaries.

The London borough of Westminster has decided that no more officers can automatically be converted into residential properties. The town of Haslmlemere has had its shops and offices given the same protection, so other towns should follow – SOON!

Fuming voters ditched the Tories because they failed to bring out a credible Local Plan early enough. Full marks to Julia Potts & Co, they did manage something. However, even that is awaiting a decision on a challenge in the High Court… again.

The largest brownfield site in the borough should have been released for housing years ago. Those delays have cost the eastern villages dearly – and the Tories have been punished for it. Now – everyone should LISTEN to the public’s concerns as the purse-strings tighten.


A giant leap for Haslemere Community Hospital.


The Royal Surrey County Hospital in Guildford has given a huge injection of funds – an amazing £9m investment for adult community care at Haslemere’s Community Hospital.

Who will it be led by? 

According to Rose Parry – Chairman of Haslemere League of Friends and once responsible for Cranleigh and Haslemere Hospitals. It will include:

“A dedicated geriatrician, A GP specialist and nurse practitioner.

Despite the challenge of recruiting GP’s, the Haslemere practice has developed a role for supporting the direct admissions, rehabilitation and reablement beds in the hospital.”

Screen Shot 2019-07-26 at 09.24.22.png

Screen Shot 2019-07-20 at 09.32.09.png


17.07.19 – Booster Jab copy

Jeremy Hunt – backs the benches?



A little bird told us here at the Waverley Web – before it was stuffed, that our MP Jeremy Hunt turned down an important role in Boris Johnson’s new cabinet.

With a rictus grin on his face – you know the one – he told all his Twitter followers…

Screen Shot 2019-07-24 at 21.46.54.png

Yes,  you guessed. Our little Westminster bird told us he believed he may have turned down the new post of Minister for Entrepreneurs?!

Screen Shot 2019-07-24 at 21.46.54

We appreciate he has been a Minister for most of his elected career, so it is heartwarming to see this tweet about his family in Hammersmith. No mention of his poor neglected Surrey electorate though. Some commentators have thought, given the polling in Guildford and South West Surrey of a Yellow Wave, he may not stand for re-election again in the forthcoming inevitable Autumn election.

Screenshot 2019-07-25 at 08.21.51

One wag suggested he really wanted to be Housing Minister to improve his portfolio!



Well done’Your Waverley’s’ first listening exercise was a rollicking​ success – and there are calls for more.


Wasn’t it former Tory Planning Portfolio holder Brian Adams who claimed recently that listening to the public would only raise unrealistic expectations?


A panel made up of the council’s new guard – almost completely switched off their microphones and did the unimaginable… they just LISTENED.

And the public thanked them for doing just that – listening – and urged them to object to the mineral extraction authority saying Surrey County Council holds the key that could unlock a catastrophe.

The Listening Panel heard from neighbours fearful of what UGOC’s oil and gas exploration in Dunsfold could do to their lives, their businesses, and their livelihoods. The heard accounts from residents whose lives and their health had already been impacted upon by drilling in Horley – and in West Sussex. They heard evidence from financial experts who painted a grim picture of the parlous financial state of exploration companies who ignore planning rules, planning conditions, and are, in the main – a law unto themselves in their pursuit of…

Screen Shot 2019-07-24 at 09.18.10.png

A highly informed and eloquent group of residents and organisations from Waverley and beyond – provided the  First Listening Exercise – with first-hand accounts of the damage already caused by oil and gas exploration in other parts of Surrey.  They also predicted the consequences of what one described as the …

Screen Shot 2019-07-24 at 09.17.28.pngNew application on Dunsfold drilling site creates “an impossible challenge” for decision-makers, say villagers

Alfold and Dunsfold ~Parish Council representatives spoke of the massive impact exploration could have on those two villages. Villages soon to see a new garden village for 1,800 homes at Dunsfold Airfield in their midst.

Ashley Hurman, A neighbouring farmer spoke of the devastation that could be caused to animals and an organic craft brewery that used water from natural wells in its production for users including the armed forces. It was just 226m of the proposed well. Wedding venue owner Tom Gordon spoke of the damaged that could be caused to his business, where reservations were sometimes made three-years in advance and events were held in the open at High Billinghurst Farm.

Others spoke of the confusion around the two applications made by UCOG and another in Alfold all hiding behind vague descriptions of the methods it would use – which is in effect – Fracking!

Environmental groups including Friends of the Earth – Patrick Haveron; Extinction Rebellion Chris Neale; SW Surrey Labour Party Natasha Fletcher; Campaign for The Preservation of Rural England (CPRE) Chris Lindesay all spoke of the catastrophic consequences to the environment from the unrelenting search for minerals.

Dunsfold resident Melanie Shown highlighted the traffic dangers, for walkers, horse riders and cyclists and also spoke up for the travelling community who lived nearby – and who had no voice.

Duns fold publican Terence O’Rourke questioned the financial security of companies saying that, should permission be allowed, should be forced to put up a bond of at least £9m to restore the land.

That money – all £9m should be paid before a spade hits the ground – if not, you can be sure – we are on our own. The costs could land in the laps of the local community.”

Jennifer Condit questioned the viability of the companies – whose risk register (all of seven pages) provided for investors revealed some startling facts. Risks they described as “minimal” including – oil spills; blowouts etcetera – and no insurance…

“I have never seen a list of risks like this  – not in my 30 years in the finance industry.”

Alison Canton from Godalming said the area under consideration was “unique” and it would be damaged for her children, and her children’s children. “This is just about making money.” What about the planet – and climate change?

Matt Phelps asked? Does Waverley Council want to be remembered as the council who opened up the Weald for drilling?

 It was pointed out by the chairman Green Party’s  Cllr Steve Williams that Waverley could only comment on the application – it was not the determining authority. 

A clip of his summing up will be the subject of another post.

But it was Lisa Scott from Horley who hammered in the final nail as she gave a graphic account of being out running and almost fainting with breathlessness after being affected by the Hydrochloric Acid during drilling activities at Horsehill – in the “Gatwick Cluster.

“It took me almost three months to recover. Family businesses had been ruined, homes cannot be sold; livestock damaged and injured; fields flooded and the community broken!”

She said planning conditions had consistently been flouted, pedestrian – ignored – cyclists – ignored – parking restrictions – ignored with lorries rocking up in Tesco’s car park! What had the county council done – nothing!

After wards Waverley’s  deputy leader – Paul Follows commented:

A really good first Executive Listening Panel session this evening (considering the Waverley borough council response to plans to drill for fossil fuels at Dunsfold) – Cllr Steve Williams did an excellent job of chairing and thank you for to our officers for arranging and bringing to life the wishes of the new administration to really engage. I am hugely proud to be deputy leader of a council committed to proper engagement and to work with a cross-party executive committed to that direction.

I must say it was very informed, eloquent and respectful participation from everyone and I am more certain than ever that engagement sessions like this are the right thing to do.

We have had plenty of comments from some sources that we shouldn’t ‘raise residents expectations’ but I think this was informative on both sides and I think everyone present understood a bit more about the facts and the process.

This sort of engagement activity will continue.




New application on Dunsfold drilling site creates “an impossible challenge” for decision-makers, say villagers


 To-day Waverley’s Executive will hold its FIRST ” LISTENING EXERCISE” to consider proposed fossil fuels exploration in Dunsfold. Waverley only has an advisory role here as by law the decision on fuel exploration is taken at County level. But advice needs to be well-documented and well-supported to have the maximum chance of success.

Tuesday from 6 -9pm  at the Waverley Council Offices.

However, Surrey Labour Party has already come out against the proposal. It believes it is contradictory for Surrey County Council, in the same breath as declaring a climate emergency driven by excessive use of fossil fuels, to then facilitate drilling for fossil fuels in Surrey.

A submission is included here SW Surrey Labour Statement Dunsfold Hydrocarbon Explorationon for which Binscombe councillor Gerry Boyle did a great deal of the work to assist in its preparation.

Let the listening begin on fossil fuel exploration in Dunsfold & Alfold?

190719 Dunsfold access route

Residents of Dunsfold have described plans for a proposed oil and gas site as “confused and muddled” and want the proposals withd

The community group, Protect Dunsfold, has called  for all the proposals to be withdrawn after a second planning application for the site by UK Oil & Gas plc was published.

The first application for two oil and gas wells, published in June 2019, included an access track off High Loxley Road.

The second application is for an alternative access off Dunsfold Road.

This new application adds 32 documents to the 88 in the first application. Some of the documents are new;  others are revised versions.

A spokesperson for Protect Dunsfold said:

“The original application, and this new one, represent an impossible challenge for the decision-making authority and statutory consultees, many of whom are unpaid volunteers.

“They are now charged with the responsibility of guessing which of the overlapping reports to consider and all of the possible outcomes and implications from these two muddled applications. With all parties making comments on some individually-created synthesis there is no certainty that comments and decisions are being made about the same thing.”

The original application was criticised for mistakes and inconsistencies. There were two different maps of the access track and one paragraph in the executive summary appeared to refer to a different site. Within a week, UKOG issued a clarification statement about one policy argument it used to support the application.

The second application includes speed survey data that was available at the time of the first application but was not referred to in the original transport statement. The new application appears to have dropped proposals for a temporary 30mph limit on Dunsfold Road that was in the first application.

The spokesperson for Protect Dunsfold said:

“It has long been our view since the day after the initial application was published, and Dunsfold Parish Council now agrees, that there are so many careless errors in the original application, and now this one, that Surrey County Council should advise UKOG that both applications will be rejected.

“The county council should advise that both applications are withdrawn and a new updated, accurate and unified application submitted which clearly explains what UKOG(234)Ltd [the licence operator] actually wants to do so it can be considered on its merits.

“This situation is now so confused that the only possible way forward is a full environmental Impact analysis which reconciles all of the various reports and data produced thus far by UKOG, together with any more data they have not yet disclosed.

“There would then be an authoritative view on the environmental impact of a unified proposal which all consultees can consider in a new, coherent, application.”

UKOG told DrillOrDrop

“We had lots of feedback from our public event [about the proposals] at Dunsfold Village Hall and a key one concerned our original access route.

“We were asked to pursue an alternative access off Dunsfold Road and this is the subject of the fresh application.”

But this statement did not satisfy Protect Dunsfold. It said:

“In truth it is quite clear from the careless inconsistencies in the initial application that this access was UKOG’s original plan, which they changed part way through their development of their application presumably because they found impediments to this access that were fatal to their case.

“By now attempting to characterise this as ‘in response to local consultation’ they are seeking to imply there is a degree of local support for their overall plan and objections are only to the access proposal, claiming a “responsiveness to local opinion” which might trump the original impediments.”

The group called on Surrey County Council to reject the first application for reasons including unsafe access. The second application should then be rejected, it said, because it was redundant – attempting to access a website that did not exist.

Revised access

The second application is for three years and seeks consent for construction, operation and restoration of a highway junction with boundary fencing, entrance gates and a 400m access track.

The junction would be secured by 2.5m high close-boarded timber panel gates, set back from Dunsfold Road, the application said.

2.5m security fencing would enclose a section of track wide enough for two heavy commercial vehicles to pass. The track would then reduce to 4.1m wide and be enclosed by stock-proof fencing.

An overhead electricity cable would be buried where it crossed the proposed route.

According to the application, the work on the junction and access track would take four weeks, using 12 construction staff and 3-6 security officers. Proposed working and delivery hours were 7am-7pm Monday-Friday and 9am-1pm on Saturday.

The application predicted 10 two-way lorry movements a day during construction. The scheme would not “have a detrimental impact” on traffic or the highway network, it said.

Required visibility splays at the junction of the track and Dunsfold Road could be achieved if trees at the access were removed, the application added. All proposed vehicle movements could be achieved within the existing roads and proposed changes.

UKOG said of the scheme:

“It represents precisely the kind of investment required if the UK is to make the ‘best use’ of its mineral resources, reduce the vulnerability of being a net-importer of energy and deliver sustainable growth. In a society where the well-being of all is the ultimate objective, such private sector support for the wider public good is acknowledged and encouraged by national energy and planning policy.”

UKOG said these benefits were enough to outweigh what it described as “minor harm” from construction and disturbance.

According to the application, nine trees and an 11m section of hedgerow would have to be removed to make way for the proposed access.

A report submitted with the application said the land that would be crossed by the access was the source of several Mesolithic flint tools. Because of this, it has been designated an area of high archaeological potential and country site of archaeological importance.

The area crossed by the access is also likely to be used by skylark and lapwing during the breeding season, the application said. Breeding birds may be present in the trees and hedgerows.

The hedges and treeline near the access provide good-quality foraging and commuting habitat for bats. A survey for UKOG found common lizard and grass snake in the area south of Dunsfold Road and it had been designated of local nature conservation value to reptiles. The area of the access route could also be colonised by badgers, the application said.

Despite these finds, consultants for UKOG concluded that the access road would have no adverse or significant effects on reptiles, bats or birds and the effects on archaeology could be made acceptable.

The decision date for both Dunsfold applications is currently set for 11 September 2019. UKOG’s proposal for extra wells and long-term oil production at its other site in Surrey, at Horse Hill, is also currently due to be decided on this date.

  • The Dunsfold scheme is to be discussed at a listening panel, organised for the first time by Waverley Borough Council, a statutory consultee on the applications. Residents and organisations are invited to give their views at a public session on tonight Tuesday 23 July 2019 from 6pm-9pm. The sessions will be webcast. DrillOrDrop will report on the event.

Will there be another runway, “by stealth”, at Gatwick?


Screen Shot 2019-07-21 at 10.57.55.png

Screen Shot 2019-07-21 at 10.58.09.pngSEVENTY planes could leave Gatwick Airport every hour if plans to use a backup runway for routine flights go ahead.

Planes that would affect parts of Waverley.

Officials recently announced that the airport plans to use its backup runway for regular departures and has unveiled a “master plan”.

Though the airport will not pursue the building of a third runway, it has said the Government will safeguard land previously earmarked for it.

Gatwick chief executive Stewart Wingate said the plans would

“incrementally grow” the airport to meet the demand for passengers.

He said:

“This would be the biggest private investment for the region in the coming years, which would result in significant local economic benefits including new jobs for the area.”

Head of corporate affairs Mark Lever tempered down fears of noise pollution saying,

 “It’s important to remember aircraft will be quieter and cleaner by the time this runway is up and running.

“The flight paths won’t be any different for departures besides flying from a different runway.”

Airport officials hope to have a planning application finished by the first half of next year.

But Mr Leber predicted the backup runway would not operate until 2026 at the earliest if plans are approved.

A spokeswoman for Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions branded the announcement…

“a second runway by stealth”.

She said:

“This announcementScreen Shot 2019-07-21 at 10.57.55.png by Gatwick management flies in the face of the Government’s pledge for ‘net zero’ CO2 emissions by 2050.

“This clearly illustrates Gatwick’s greed comes before everything and must now be seen as the neighbour from hell for all the communities of Surrey & Sussex that already find aircraft noise unbearable.

“It is totally disingenuous to the residents of Crawley to continue to safeguard land for a third runway when housing demand is high.”

Let the listening begin on fossil fuel exploration in Dunsfold & Alfold?


You did what – Jeremy?


YOU – delivered the Olympics? And no doubt can run the country single-handed?



Absolutely – it is about what you deliver! Ask the residents of Farnham what you have delivered there? As for your promises – how about this one?

Now – what do you say about this disgrace Jeremy?

Farnham’s Redgrave Rests in Pieces.

We wonder if Waverley Planners will take enforcement action against this little outfit?


Not – if they pay enough?

Marvel filming despite planning delay

FILMING for a new blockbuster movie has got underway at Hankley Common despite a related planning application still waiting to be determined.

The upcoming Marvel film Black Widow, starring Scarlett Johansson, started filming this week, with the second week of filming due to take place next month.

However, despite planning applications being made to Waverley Borough Council, no formal decision has been made surrounding the use of the current nature reserve and Ministry of Defence site as a film set.

Working under the title ‘Blue Bayou’, filming took place on July 16-17, with another five days of filming due to take place between August 20 and August 27, with sets also under construction.

The application includes the “change of use of land for a temporary period to allow outdoor filming”, “use of building and hardstanding construction of sets” as well as 200 parking spaces and use of controlled fire effects.

Details of the sets for construction also include a “helicopter crash”, “plane crash site” and the “Russian farmstead”. Hankley Common has been the site of many famous films and television shows, particularly James Bond movies such as The World Is Not Enough, Die Another Day and Skyfall.

A Waverley Borough Council spokesman said

“The planning application is currently under consideration and there will be no decision on this until at least August 2.

“The agent for the application has been contacted to remind them that any filming which takes place outside of planning permission may represent a breach of planning control and may be subject to enforcement action.” Anyone wishing to report a breach should visit

Residents can also post their own comments through Waverley Borough Council’s planning site at using reference WA/2019/1035.

This article comes from the fantastic Farnham Herald.

The first meeting of ‘Your new Waverley​.’ Let the battles begin?


Five minutes into the first Full Meeting of ‘Your Waverley’  and the gloves were on and the spats began.

Oh dear – Alfold’s former policeman turned politician isn’t happy now he doesn’t have his posterior pinned to a seat on Waverley’s Executive.   He fears as a back-bencher he won’t get enough of a say – or is it perhaps money, out of Dunsfold proposed new 1,800/2,600  garden village? Coming to an airfield near him soon?



So up popped the weasel from Bramley to provide the first slap of the evening, to ask on the Alfold Councillors behalf – how the NEW EXECUTIVE planned to oversee the Dunsfold development?   O.M.G. and didn’t those two words “New Executive” stick in the gullet of Tory Richard Seaborne. The very same councillor who, along with Cllr DeAnus opposed ANY development on the largest Brownfield site in the borough. Perish the thought that they should now be so concerned about how it is to be managed.  Without the benefit of their spanners in the works, perhaps? By the way, why wasn’t  Alfold’s Bobby delivering the question he posed? Or was he at Dunsfold Park with his begging bowl?

Screen Shot 2019-07-17 at 21.36.44.png

Want to know why?

Numerous members of the public have been debating this little matter on our scurrilous Blog for some time. Now there’s your answer Bunty and Aunty Doris.

View the clip above: – Listen very carefully – as both the Leader John Ward and his Deputy Paul Follows deliver the slap, bang, wallop on behalf of ‘Your New Waverley.’


As he says on the clip – this is the third time you (The Tory Group) have asked this question? Why? Or is this for the benefit of the public? 

So we are doing our civic duty by bringing it to your breakfast table this morning.


Scoring goals is becoming a bit of a habit for Alfold.


Screen Shot 2019-07-17 at 09.41.44.pngEarlier this year ‘Your Waverley’ gave a cash boost to Alfold Football Club. It handed over £20,000 towards improvements to its grounds to include: new floodlights, a spectator stand and other ground improvements.

For a football club whose members come from Crawley – yes, Crawley, not Cranleigh, or Alfold or Dunsfold but Crawley in West Sussex. Apparently, its players don’t even train in Alfold – they train in, yes you get it – Crawley!

Did the money come from developer’s contributions under their 106 Agreement contributions for infrastructure? Because although 150 new homes have been consented only 20 plus + have so far been built in Loxwood Road. And not forgetting Surrey County Council’s new school units which didn’t need planning consent let alone contribute infrastructure contributions. No sign yet, we are told by villagers of the rest of the proposed developments at Brockhurst and the former Wyevale Garden Centre. or, perhaps the planners have other sites in mind for further development?

Now the village has hit the jackpot twice, in a matter of months. This time ‘Your Waverley’ has awarded Alfold Sports & Social Club a thumping £73,300 towards improving the clubhouse and the village hall.

Just goes to show how effective it is when councillors dub a village… 

…”Poor old Alfold?”

And you have former bobby Cllr Kevin Deanus to put his best foot forward for your  team?

The money comes from “YW’s’ capital receipts and improving Alfold is one of its corporate priorities, as it will actively engage the club’s social sporting customers and ensure sporting and social opportunities exist for all.

Apparently, the money comes from “easement funds” which are allocated towards communities and sporting facilities, the WW presumes, throughout the borough?

Now here at the WW, we wouldn’t want to be accused of peeing on anyone’s fireworks, or in this case, goalposts, particularly as there are among our team, football fanatics. But we do wonder what this part of the report means:


1. Alfold has seen some significant housing developments in the local area and as a result, some of the community facilities in existence need to be enhanced to meet this additional need. Following Executive approval, Waverley Borough Council received a financial sum from a housing development in Alfold for its interest in some adjacent land required for access. The majority of this sum will contribute to Waverley’s overall capital programmes but this report proposes that a relatively small proportion is allocated to improve local facilities in Alfold. This project covers two organisations which cater to the needs of the Young and Elderly both in sport, leisure and community well being. Alfold Parish Council is supportive and the proposed scheme has been developed following several meetings with members of the Sports and Social club. The Club will be managing the project governance.

“Significant housing in the local area” Around 150, if they are all built – and presently under construction 55? Or are they including Alfold’s new neighbour? The Dunsfold new garden village.


  1. Alfold Village Hall was built in 1963. It was the culmination of considerable local fundraising and the physical hard work of the community. Over the past 53 years, the village Hall has continued to flourish. In 2005 the hall was extended, the kitchen enlarged and a small meeting room built and the toilets were refurbished. The hall is structurally sound, but as the years go by, the fixtures and fittings are becoming tired and worn. Fundraising takes place, but the amount raised is generally small, and the upgrades and replacements are beyond their reach. The carpet requires replacing, and new tables and chairs are urgently needed. The stage curtains are at the end of their useful life, and the car park is inadequate to cope with the demand to park. The purchase of parking strips will allow for this parking and help protect the grass. The ovens in the kitchen need replacing as they are inefficient, and hand driers in the building would be both more efficient in financial terms, but also more hygienic.
  2. These necessary improvements will allow the hall to be fit for purpose for the future and will ensure that the facilities are used extensively for future generations as they are now.
  3. Alfold Sports and Social Club has been serving the community for over 40 years. The facilities support sporting activity to football, cricket, tennis, stoolball and darts, as well as providing an environment for social events.
  4. The clubhouse was last updated many years ago. The carpets are worn and ripped in many places being held in place with tape, and the curtains which were made by a local resident, are still in use some 30 years later.
  5. The clubhouse requires the ceiling to be removed, and old wiring to be removed or replaced. The club needs insulating to be more efficient. The general electrics need to be brought up to current standards, and the plumbing system needs to be upgraded to be able to cope with the current demands. The curtains, chairs and tables need replacing, and in addition, some alterations are required to make better use of the building. The existing beam needs to be removed so a larger opening can be created. With the installation of folding doors, it will enable the club to be split into two, maximising its potential use. Walls need plastering, skirting and floor screed will make the facilities outstanding, and upgrades to the existing kitchen facilities.
  6. Finance Implications:

Estimated Costs


Village Hall
Alfold Sports & Social Club

£18,200 £55,500




Alfold Community WBC Easement

£12,500 £61,200




Alfold Football Club puts its best foot forward – whilst Cranleigh’s 106 monies go to A Cranleigh top fee-paying school!

Do you really trust our MP and former Health Secretary to run our country?


An investigation by the Health Service Journal – the country’s premier health publication has revealed that despite multiple warnings about the national 999 IT system they were ignored by both SW Surrey MP former Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt and his successor Matt Hancock.

Patients have died after the government overruled multiple safety concerns raised about an IT system used to triage 16 million NHS patients a year.


On at least three occasions where patients triaged by the NHS Pathways software died months, sometimes years, after central agencies were alerted to safety concerns by ambulance trusts – but declined to make changes requested.

NHS Digital – the organisation that oversees NHS Pathways assessed the complaints but made changes only where “clinically necessary”. It has repeatedly asked coroners to “strike from the record” concerns raised about the safety of NHS Pathways’ advice.

Since 2015, coroners investigating 11 patient deaths have called for changes to the NHS Pathways software, used by NHS 111 and 999 services to triage patient calls, to prevent future deaths.

Coroners have raised these concerns with health and social care secretary Matt Hancock, his predecessor Jeremy Hunt, NHS England, NHS Digital, the Care Quality Commission and service providers. Although NHS Pathways is run by NHS Digital, overall responsibility rests with NHS England.

Agonal breathing

Among the cases uncovered by HSJ, two women – Caragh Melling, 37 and Barbara Patterson, 67 – with agonal breathing died on 27 December 2014 and 2 January 2015 respectively after NHS Pathways was used to triage their calls. Agonal breathing is sudden, irregular gasps of breath, requiring immediate CPR.

Two separate coroners’ investigations following their deaths raised concerns about how agonal breathing was handled by NHS Pathways and recommended changes to prevent future deaths.

However, between 2010 and 2014, at least three different ambulance trusts raised concerns with the national NHS Pathways team on four occasions about the software failing to advise call handlers to identify life-threatening agonal breathing. 

In both the women’s cases, ambulance trusts told the coroner no changes were made to address their concerns about NHS Pathways before the deaths.

In a report sent to NHS Pathways’ clinical director in April 2016 regarding Ms Melling’s death, the coroner stated:

“NHS Pathways were contacted in 2014 to raise the absence of the breathing analysis tool as being a cause for concern. No action appears to have been taken. I also understand that the medical director of the ambulance trust has again raised concerns at the national level, but it is unclear whether any action is being taken.”

However, said some changes were made to the early assessment of patient breathing in 2014, ahead of the two deaths.

Both the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS Digital claimed that, despite concerns raised by ambulance trusts, there had been no faults in the system for treating agonal breathing and any fault lay with call handlers, not the software.  NHS Digital confirmed it declined to make changes to agonal breathing requested by a provider in 2014, over concerns it would delay CPR.

It is not clear whether ambulance trusts’ concerns about NHS Pathway’s handling of agonal breathing have been resolved. NHS Digital said further amendments were made in June 2015, 2016 and 2017.

However, one ambulance trust source said several ambulance providers have continued to log concerns about agonal breathing.

Lone callers

In a separate case, another coroner raised concerns with NHSE in July 2017 after the death of Colin Sluman, 68, the previous year. Among other recommendations, the coroner said changes were needed to how NHS Pathways prompted call handlers to ask whether a patient was alone to prevent future deaths.

NHS England responded to the coroner saying it had raised these concerns with NHS Digital’s lead clinical author for NHS Pathways, Darren Worwood, who declined to make any changes and had said responsibility for assessing whether a patient is alone was with 999 and 111 providers.

In September 2018, another man, John Scott, died and a separate coroner again raised concerns, this time directly with Mr Worwood, about the way NHS Pathways advised call handlers to deal with patients alone when calling.

In its response to the coroner, NHS Digital again said determining whether a patient was alone was the responsibility of 999/111 providers, not the NHS Pathways software.

Software updates

The NHS Pathways software is updated twice a year but it is unclear whether these updates directly address concerns raised by coroners and NHS providers about the treatment of patients that are alone and those exhibiting agonal breathing.

One ambulance trust told HSJ that improvements would be made to NHS Pathway’s advice concerning patients alone this year, or possibly early next year. However, NHS Digital has previously stated no change was required.

 NHS Digital says there had been no faults in the NHS Pathways system in agonal breathing and patients alone cases and blamed any failures on local 999 and 111 providers not using the system correctly. In some of the other deaths raised by coroners, NHS Digital agreed to make changes to the software.

NHS Digital said: “We take any coroner’s report we receive very seriously and work with our partner organisations across the NHS to ensure that we respond appropriately and make the necessary changes to the system if required. It is categorically untrue that there are any cases where concerns have been raised and changes have not been made to the system where they have been deemed clinically necessary.”

However, the organisation will not share the NHS Pathways incident log. This would provide a full record of users’ concerns raised with NHS Digital. It said it would take too long for staff to extract the information requested. 

Responding specifically to concerns raised about agonal breathing, NHS Digital said it “strongly refuted there was a problem with the system” and said, in the case of Mrs Patterson’s death, ambulance call handlers “were not probing adequately in assessing the breathing pattern”.

What is the NHS Pathways?

NHS Pathways snap

NHS Pathways is a piece of clinical software, run by NHS Digital, that is used to assist non-clinically trained call handlers to elicit information, offer advice and dispatch medical assistance based on a patient’s call.

It is used to triage all NHS 111 calls in England and many, but not all, 999 calls. Overall, it is used to assess and triage more than 16 million calls a year.

It also powers NHS 111 Online, a website and app that allows patients to enter symptoms directly into the software and receive triage advice without human involvement. Launched in 2017, NHS 111 Online has been used a million times and, as of February this year accounted for one in 10 uses of NHS Pathways.

NHS 111 and 999 providers are expected to strictly adhere to prompts and scripts in the software, or risk losing their licence to use it. However, in some instances, providers have created local workarounds where they feel there are gaps in the advice offered.

The software covers more than 800 symptom pathways and its content is overseen by a national clinical governance group, hosted by the Royal College of GPs, which regularly reviews and updates the content twice a year.

NHS Digital says when potential issues are raised about the software, a clinical assessment is made within 24 hours. When changes are needed to NHS Pathways, these changes are independently clinically assessed and tested before going live.

The current senior responsible officer for NHS Pathways is NHS England’s digital development director, Sam Shah, who has recently shifted to the new central tech unit NHSX.


The investigation also reveals that several ambulance trusts have created “local workarounds” to fill gaps in the advice offered by NHS Pathways. This was despite many saying their call handlers, who have no clinical training, have no discretion to deviate from the NHS Pathways advice, and one claiming any deviation would risk NHS Digital withdrawing their licence to use the software. In February this year, a coroner told NHS Digital:

“There appears to be a contradiction between the call handlers being told they have no discretion when using NHS Pathways and their being given additional guidance for certain calls. This contradiction could cause confusion.”

NHS Digital said: “NHS Pathways is not a ‘scripted’ system where there is no ability to deviate from the exact wording presented. Call handlers are trained to form appropriate ‘probing questions’ when needed, or to rephrase questions safely and effectively.”

Neither NHSE nor the DHSC answered questions posed by HSJ regarding the process for responding to specific safety concerns raised about NHS Pathways, including in cases where patients later died.

In a statement, a DHSC spokesman said: “We take any concerns raised by coroners very seriously and as part of our long-term plan we want the NHS to be the safest healthcare system in the world. Where coroner reports are issued to the department for a response, we work with the relevant bodies to ensure concerns are carefully considered and learnings are identified, so that appropriate action can be taken.”

An NHSE spokesman said: “Assessment systems used by 999 or NHS 111 services are regularly reviewed by clinical experts to ensure that they classify a patient’s needs as accurately as possible, based on the answers given by the person making the call, and therefore give them the right response or advice.

“While incidents like these are therefore extremely rare, where concerns are raised they are clinically investigated and any necessary changes made.”


Guess what – ‘Your Waverley’ has started to LISTEN!


The recent election results revealed something quite extraordinary at ‘Your Waverley.’ 

That it needs to listen more to the communities it serves to ensure the borough feels more like ‘Our Waverley.’

As part of a whole programme of change planned by the New Guard – a coalition of Greens, Labour, Lib Dems and Farnham Residents’ – and hopefully, Conservatives once they stop grizzling, to listen more. Heading the change is Waverley’s Chief Executive Tom Horwood who, as you can see,  is already in listening mode. So if you want to be heard get in touch to-day July 15


Screen Shot 2019-07-05 at 20.40.48.png

Even the head honcho at Waverley Towers is seeking new ways of engaging with the public now the New Guard – Progressive Alliance – holds the reins. Tom Horwood and the new brooms have already begun sweeping in a new way of working and engaging with the public – and we say, about time too.

Let’s just hope they don’t start sweeping away those huge cobwebs in The Towers darkest corners -Ye Gods we could be history!

Screen Shot 2019-07-05 at 20.40.13.png







A Government Commission says councils ‘should shame developers of the worst housing plans.’


Maybe, just maybe, ‘Your Waverley’s’ planning officers should take a good look at a report due this week.

‘That council should make an example of ugly building design and that communities should be given greater input to ensure better quality homes.’

The Buiding Better, Building Beautiful Commission (BBBBC) would have a field day in the borough of Waverley. A local authority which has, in the past consistently and completely ignored the public’s concern for the type and style of new development which is being literally “dumped” on their doorsteps, many of which are in rural and semi-rural villages.

The Commission has concluded that while the current planning system can deliver beautiful places to live, it does so, “rarely.” And, residents should be given a greater voice.

Both wannabe prime ministers, Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt are dodging the housing crisis by failing to set out sufficiently ambitious plans to tackle the housing shortage. Though here at the WW we suspect their spin doctors are advising them to steer clear of the thorny issue of building more AND BETTER homes. Particularly here in Farnham which is currently being swamped?

So Waverley Borough Council – the Government’s message to YOU is: SAY NO TO UGLINESS.

Screen Shot 2019-07-08 at 09.41.38.png


If you have wondered how difficult it is to get robust planning decisions at ‘Your Waverley’ watch this clip.

Are Waverley’s eastern​ villages under siege​?​ From up, down, and all-around​?


Bulldozers on the ground – a rising number of Gatwick planes proposed overhead, and now oil exploration giants queueing up to go underground in the search for oil and gas in Alfold and Dunsfold.

However,  it is Government policy to encourage oil and gas exploration in the UK.

 MP and wannabe PM Jeremy Hunt has already said he is keeping his options open – and is talking to his mates in the oil and gas industry who live near him in Dunsfold & Chiddingfold before he makes his mind up. 

WW wonders if he has talked to the largest concentration of gipsies who live adjacent to the drilling site or other villagers who could be affected? Or don’t they matter?

Certainly ‘Your New Waverley’ Is taking the matter very seriously and is setting up a Listening Exercise – so that everyone can make their views known. We will post on the details of this later.

Screen Shot 2019-07-09 at 12.34.17.png

UKOG – UK Oil & Gas PLC  

UKOG – UK Oil & Gas is just one of the companies intent of finding fuel in Dunsfold – and elsewhere in the Waverley Borough. Conoco has already found gas in nearby Alfold and villagers heard this week that IGas Energy also wants to join the party. drilling company seeks to explore for oil and gas near Surrey village of Dunsfold 

Roll up – roll-up. Exploration to the east of Dunsfold and now to the north of Dunsfold. However, we believe, the owners of Dunsfold aerodrome, under whose land the deposits lay, has refused requests to drill there. 

Here is some information prepared by Cranleigh resident and retired geologist Chris Bulley helpfully provided through The Cranleigh Society to assist residents to navigate their way through the oil and gas fields.

Surrey County Council – SCC Ref 2019/0072 (

Waverley Borough Council WA/2019/0796 Is for the Loxley Well site South of Dunsfold Rd and east of High Loxley Farm. 

Submitted 30/5/19; public consultation opened 11/6/19; public consultation ends 8/7/19; withdrawn late June subject to resubmission with revised access route.

However, Surrey County Council will take representations from the public later.

Drilling at Dunsfold – What is planned and Updates to application

UKOG  submitted a planning application to Surrey County Council (SCC) in May 2019 to drill a conventional gas appraisal well in the Dunsfold area. UKOG hoped the planning application would be decided before year-end.  The area is covered by Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence PEDL234 and operations are regulated by the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA), a government agency, which reports to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (DBEIS), where a company’s financial and operational competencies are checked.

In June, UKOG confirmed it would submit a revised application to SCC due to the need to pursue an alternative access route. The originally proposed access road might have impacted sites of reptile activity and of prehistoric activity, in an Area of High Archaeological Potential. UKOG has not put a timescale on when the application will be resubmitted.

The application covers a gas appraisal well on the eastern extension of the Godley Bridge structure, which has been previously drilled by Conoco with the Godley Bridge-1, Alfold-1 and Godley Bridge-2 wells in 1982/3, 1986 and 1986/7, respectively, (without incident). The map below (from UKOG’s November 2018 corporate presentation with annotation. the location of these three wells with respect to the gross reservoir structure. The potential gas-bearing reservoir is the Portland Sandstone of uppermost Jurassic age, which is at a depth of around 2,800 feet (about 850 metres) below sea-level. The Portland Sandstone is a recognised oil/gas producing reservoir elsewhere in the Weald Basin such as at the Horse Hill discovery. The drilling plan for the appraisal well includes a deeper test of the underlying Kimmeridge section (a section of rocks found at Kimmeridge Bay, Dorset, and running beneath the Weald), which UKOG considers lies within the largest untested Kimmeridge feature in the Weald Basin. The appraisal well will drill to a vertical depth of about 4,750 feet (nearly one mile) below the surface. It is planned that the appraisal pilot hole, horizontal sidetrack and testing programme can commence in late 2020 following further production drilling at Horse Hill near Gatwick.

There is no fracking planned within the proposed drilling programme and if UKOG was to consider it necessary a further planning application would be mandatory.

The well site would be a zero-discharge site with the whole area and adjacent drainage ditches covered by an impermeable membrane, a tried and tested process. Once the operations are complete: if the wells are considered commercially viable then a further application would be submitted to retain the site for longer-term production of hydrocarbons; otherwise, the site would be restored to its original use. The site itself is located upon Weald Clay, an impermeable rock.

The new well will appraise an accumulation that could contain a significant gross gas-in-place estimated at around 60 billion cubic feet, similar in size to a small North Sea field.

UKOG plan to long-term test any hydrocarbons encountered in the well in order to assess commercial viability in as short a time as possible.

Of additional interest, following the decision by DEFRA not to renew the lease at Bury Hill Wood for Europa Oil & Gas to drill the Holmwood well to beneath Coldharbour, UKOG has become an operator for the hydrocarbon licence (PEDL143) and is assessing other potential well sites for exploratory drilling. UKOG states that the locations under review fall outside the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

As of 4th July, IGas Energy PLC, the operator of the licence to the west of Dunsfold that covers the western half of the Godley Bridge structure (including wells Godley Bridge-1 and Godley Bridge-2) has announced that it plans to drill two exploration/appraisal wells on Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence PEDL235 to explore and evaluate the resource potential of both the Portland Sandstones and the Kimmeridge Micrites.

It will now move to submit a planning application but will undertake community consultation to take account of feedback from local residents before submitting the full planning application. This will take place on August 1 at the Winn Hall Dunsfold between 4p.m. and 8 p.m.

A spokesman for XR said: “It’s disappointing that UKOG is ignoring public opinion in Dunsfold and Surrey generally by pressing ahead with its application.

“Exploring new sources of oil makes no sense at all given the desperate need to reduce carbon emissions. XR groups across the county are already campaigning for Surrey County Council to refuse all oil drilling applications in the region.

“We encourage other people concerned about this to join us. We need to make sure all projects of this type are stopped or we will end up with oil wells spread across the whole region.”

During UKOG’s pre-application public consultation in February, many residents and campaigners voiced their concerns about the potential environmental impacts.

One resident said she felt the proposal is “a threat to human health and animal health” and another campaign group said the site would “industrialise our countryside, add to HGV movements in country lanes, and pose a pollution risk to our water, soil and air”.

In response to these concerns, UKOG released an information leaflet to “counteract the fiction being circulated by well known and ill-informed scaremongers”.

Chief executive, Stephen Sanderson, said: “We are not fracking. We do not want to and do not need to because the rock formations we’re targeting are naturally fractured by Mother Nature and can flow oil and gas sufficiently well on their own. This statement of fact is supported by our activities at Horse Hill near Gatwick Airport and at Broadford Bridge near Billingshurst

“We are not looking for shale gas or shale oil as in the North of England. Our work uses only conventional oil field techniques as used in over 2,000 wells in the onshore UK and the three wells drilled in the Dunsfold area in the late 1980s. Our aim is to assess the commercial viability of the conventional gas and oil discovery made by these three 1980s wells.”

In his statement, Mr Sanderson said UKOG’s “primary objective” is to…

 “appraise the gas discovery made in the 1980s at Godley Bridge, which extends for about 10km and underlies Dunsfold Aerodrome”.

However, he dismissed claims that UKOG is causing earthquakes and said operations would not “industrialise Surrey or Sussex”, pollute the area or create “HGV chaos”.

The statement continues: “Our activities are designed to increase the UK’s energy security by reducing the increasing dependence on long-distance oil imports from places that often have less rigorous safety and environmental standards than the UK.

“Even if all vehicles become electric by 2030, we’ll still need to import 300-400,000 barrels of oil per day without increased UK onshore oil production.”

More to follow.

Mr Sanderson pledged to restore the site once activities have ceased, and share UKOG’s profits with the community if the well site is successful.

If permission is granted by Surrey County Council, UKOG hopes to begin work in late 2019 or early 2020.

The Weald Action Group has been contacted for comment.

  • Like us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Daily NewsletterPrivacy notice


Godalming’s Neighbourhood Plan referendum result.


A Referendum on Godalming’s Neighbourhood Plan was held on Tuesday here’s a post we put up on the day. And below is the result.

Not a huge turnout for such an important document? But a convincing seal of approval for a Neighbourhood Plan that will underpin Waverley’s Local Plan, and could put a little more power back into the hands of Godalming residents.

If you care about Godalming’s future get out there today and vote in your vital referendum.

Screen Shot 2019-07-11 at 07.59.06.png

Screen Shot 2019-07-11 at 07.59.21.png


Spot all Hunt’s Besties who have been given​ the order of the boot from ‘Your Waverley?’


But Oh dear, will some of them be affected by his reluctance to oppose oil exploration in Waverley?

Spot all the unseated Tories plus Peter Martin & Bobby Know-less who hang on in there.

Denise Le Gal
Ged Hall
Tony Gordon Smith (asleep)
David Munro

Zimmer frames ready for action?

As you may have heard when interviewed last week on BBC Surrey – Jeremy is keeping his options open on oil/gas exploration proposed in Dunsfold, mind you, he does that on most things doesn’t he, keeps his options open?

Flip, flop, flit flop here he goes again… He said he is talking to a number of experts in Dunsfold and Chiddingfold who are involved in the oil industry. We can think of a few people in Milford he should speak too?

Are you on your way from Mares Pond Copse Jeremy? Because what with one thing and another life could be getting even hotter there for you than jumping into Theresa’s leopardskin shoes?

Screen Shot 2019-07-07 at 11.56.19.png
There is a great map on the Friends of the Earth website which shows who falls within petroleum licence area, Adam Taylor Smith for one and all those other south of Milford Tory loyalists. Just stick a postcode in. UK fracking map Where could fracking happen? You may be surprised.

The Map shows areas in the UK selected for fracking – and where licenses have either been granted or are under consideration.  Coming to a field near you?


Screen Shot 2019-06-11 at 09.02.52.png

Screen Shot 2019-04-25 at 07.20.24.png

If you care about Godalming’s future get out there today and vote in your vital referendum.



Or you could stay at home – watch Wimbledon and let others spend YOUR money and make your decisions for you?


Yes, we know that we are all referundumed out – but if Godalming is to get developer’s dosh towards its vital infrastructure – we/you must all vote NOW for the town’s Neighbourhood Plan.

The plan certainly ain’t perfect, but one thing is certain – better an imperfect Neighbourhood Plan, that can be revised,  than no plan at all? Because without the vital document to underpin the Waverley Local Plan 25% instead of a measly 15% of developer’s contributions towards vital services will go to… yes, you guessed – ‘Your Waverley’ and Surrey County Council not to the town that bears the brunt of swathes of development proposed on former green belt land and open countryside.

Listen carefully to Deputy Leader Paul Follows’ words in this message. If you don’t have the time or inclination to vote – then don’t moan or groan – just suffer in silence when the bulldozers move onto a green field near you?

Here’s the link:

And here’s a post we made earlierDo you want Godalming to have a bigger say in how it develops in the future?

If you have wondered how difficult it is to get robust planning decisions at ‘Your Waverley’ watch this clip.


Waverley’s senior planning committee was considering an application by Waverley’s NBW – Crest Nicholson – to build 100 homes at Woodside Park,  in Catteshall Lane, Godalming adjacent to the ambulance station.

Until the New Guard took over in May CNS, has more or less been able to do pretty much as it liked!

Officers and members of the old administration have been playing ping-pong with this scheme for quite a while, but the old boys granted outline permission shortly before the election with only 17% affordable housing.  Just in case you didn’t know developers cannot afford to provide (a.h) because their “Viability Assessments” prove they cannot trouser enough dosh if they do. 

Screen Shot 2019-07-08 at 09.41.38.png

Building described by neighbours as “A Fortress.”

New councillors – and even some old – were not impressed with the bulk of the building; lack of parking which could prompt even more off-street parking in Catteshall Lane; the design; lack of infrastructure; density and the impact of a building with balconies overlooking another new development  in the “lane.”

Unable to prevent the development going ahead, due to extant outline permission granted; objectors had to make do with sending the scheme back to the developer… again for revisions that address concerns.

Some members of the new committee went head to head with the officers to oppose the scheme. Which proved to be about as popular as root canal treatment judging by the body languages displayed by the council’s “planning experts.” 

See and hear the debate for yourselves by clicking on the link below.

Screen Shot 2019-07-07 at 11.03.53.png

Languishing in his new throne as if he had occupied it for years Richard Cole, couldn’t contain himself from supporting everything put in front of him – even one of the worst examples of urbanising development ever seen in a village! Backward Point, aptly named for a Miller Homes development in Ewhurst. Backward step more like?

Has the new incumbent been receiving his Induction for the role from the – Isherwood/Cockburn duo?  Or is it a case of – if you sit in the hot seat approve it? And if you can, shut anyone up who tries to take an opposing view?

Come back Cllr David Else – a chairman and a professional in the true sense of the word.

It is a brave man who tries to shut up the new Deputy Leader Paul Follows, who persuaded the committee to ignore officers recommendations to approve the details for 100 homes, with inadequate parking,  on a road its townfolk have described as a  ‘death trap and a living hell.’

Screen Shot 2019-06-29 at 09.21.49.png

Thankfully Cranleigh’s pocket rocket AKA Cllr Elizabeth Townsend who only moments earlier had almost busted her britches at officers’ suggestions that it was perfectly satisfactory to look into people’s bedrooms from the proposed Woodside Park balconies into houses only recently completed on the other side of the road.

Whilst reading officer Patrick Arthur’s’ horoscope she said:

“No Patrick we should, and do care about balconies that overlook other people’s homes across the road, ” She then launched into a full-blown attack on those who didn’t include planning conditions agreed by members; who omitted vital conditions and reports from the likes of Thames Water and the environmental agencies!

Just an aside: We can’t help wondering why a development consultant who owns his own Sussex -based business fighting for the past nine years for developers has now morphed into a senior planning officer? Does anyone know?

Screen Shot 2019-07-07 at 11.17.26.png

Screen Shot 2019-07-07 at 11.17.52.png


Friends of the Earth stalwart and Milford resident Mike Smyth is a winner.


Well done Mike and Kathy Smyth.

A PIONEERING eco-initiative for schools masterminded by a Milford member of Waverley Friends of the Earth has won the prestigious national prize awarded by the Co-op at a ceremony in Manchester.

Mike Smyth, chairman of The Schools’ Energy Co-operative Ltd, took home the prize for the ‘Inspiring Co-op of the Year Awards.’ Mike and his wife Kathy worked tirelessly on environmental issues all over the Waverley borough – including an enterprise in Alfold.

 The co-op based in Godalming has installed  – free of charge – panels on 50 schools all over the country, providing them with sustainable solar-powered electricity supply at reduced prices, engaging both the local community and students in its projects.  It supports school members by providing an alternative to the prevailing commercial rent-a-roof or leasing model.

The group’s main aim is to retain as much as possible of the benefits for the schools, their students and the surrounding communities.

It also provides educational support to member schools and works with the schools and local community groups to maximise the environmental, educational and community impact of the solar installations.

The co-op was originally launched in August 2014 to install its flagship 150kW array of solar panels at Glenleigh Park Primary Academy in Bexhill, East Sussex, and that scheme is still one of the largest community-owned school solar systems in the country.

Mike and project director Laura Moreno were presented with their award at a gala dinner during Co-op Congress in Manchester, the sector’s annual conference, which was celebrating its landmark 150th year. Its annual awards are a celebration of excellence and achievement in the co-op sector.

 Mike Smyth said: “I am absolutely delighted that we have won the award for most Inspiring Co-op and grateful to everybody who voted for us.

“I certainly didn’t expect us to win as we are a relatively small co-op and we were up against some much larger organisations.

“I think we won because the public recognised and identified with our core mission which is to help schools tackle climate change by generating renewable energy but also to support them financially in their educational and environmental work.”

The co-op scooped the prize after a public vote which saw numerous organisations and individuals shortlisted in six categories. A record 33,000 votes were cast across all categories, with nominations and votes coming from large and small businesses, members, customers and co-operators across the sector.

Ed Mayo, secretary-general of Co-operatives UK, said: “The Schools’ Energy Co-operative Ltd is an outstanding example of how working co-operatively creates opportunity, prosperity and meaningful work, and brings social and economic benefits to communities and businesses throughout the country.”

Is the ‘Silly Season’ just about to get a whole lot sillier – at ‘Your Waverley.’ UPDATED.



This is the development on former recreation land sold by Cranleigh Parish Council in a land swap with CVHT for £1 –  for a HOSPITAL The ‘charity’ now wants to build a £14million development to include an 80 -bed Private Care Home, with 20 community beds and  26 bed-hostel for health workers from anywhere.



STAND BY YOUR BEDS! ALL HOLIDAY LEAVE IS CANCELLED in Cranleigh-upon-Sea, in light of an imminent invasion by the BED SNATCHERS & LAND GRABBERS!

Now listen up everyone! We have some very important news that (Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust – (CVHT) would rather you, the hoi polloi, didn’t know.

Whilst the rest of us schmucks are wriggling into our itsy-bitsy bikinis, schlepping around in our flippers and snorkels and dusting off our buckets and spades, in an effort to enjoy a bit of down-time, the ‘movers and shakers’, as they like to be known – more like ‘on-the-makers’! – behind the misnamed Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust – henceforth to be known as the Cranleigh Village Hospital *uck-up are gearing up for a coup!

Yep, that’s right. All aboard the CVHT Gravy Train! Not content with shafting local residents out of millions of pounds which they fund-raised for their dream – for a local village hospital – which has turned into a nightmare – a privately owned but publically funded care home – the money-rustling-grabbers are now gearing-up to seek planning consent by stealth … whilst all the objectors and those likely to ask awkward questions are up to their elbows in saltwater, thus enabling the CVHT *uck-up to avoid getting into any more hot water!

CVHT HAS fobbed off the infamous Andy Webb of the Cranleigh Community Facebook Group – nothing to do with the Waverley Web we hasten to add! – with a dumper-truck full of platitudes about consulting with the village, after it receives planning permission in August.   An 80 bed Care Home with fees normally charged by HC1 of circa £1,200 – £1, 300 per week, and a measly 20 community beds for Surrey County Council – instead of a new Cottage HOSPITAL to replace the old cottage hospital, the trustees of Cranleigh Village Hospital *uck-up, clearly think they’re home and dry!

Screen Shot 2019-07-06 at 08.39.00.png

Community beds, we might add, that will now serve the ENTIRE population of Surrey – and not just the admittedly huge CCG (Commissioning Care Group area (Waverley & Guildford)) first predicted by the WW.

Why not go the whole hog and take the entire county into Cranleigh? After all, we now understand that the proposed affordable housing elsewhere has, and will, take residents from around the county too.

Needless to say, in true County Council style, it, will only undertake to pay a miserly £600 + for a bed, so the worried-well-to-do, who can actually afford an HC1 bed will be subsidising beds for the cash-strapped County Council which is desperately back-filling its gold plated pension black hole with dumper trucks full of poor old council taxpayers cash as fast as it can shovel!

These Local Authority wallers are the very same wallers who have closed 65 beds at  Longfields Homes in Cranleigh and more at Cobgates Nursing Home here in Farnham, replacing them with CARE home beds, at a knock-down price, in Cranleigh, so they can then flog off their own site – trousering a couple of million along the way – and build another shed-load of “affordable homes” or top up their gold-plated pension pots whilst LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK!

We have heard from a former CVHT volunteer that many of them believe that they, too, have been shafted – having given many thousands of hours of their time AND MONEY – for what is now considered a lost cause.

They are now calling for one million pounds of the LEASE money and the money they fundraised to go to the REAL & ONLY CRANLEIGH VILLAGE HOSPITAL to improve its growing number of essential diagnostic services. 

Cranleigh League of Friends has just opened a half-a-million pound X-ray facility, with money raised from the same villages,  and the Royal Surrey is committed to bringing in more facilities.

So instead of donning their swimmers, might we suggest the New Guard at ‘Your Waverley‘ ensure the hearing of this highly controversial scheme is postponed until September– after all, that’s only another month. We understand villagers have been waiting for a NEW HOSPITAL – with all the trimmings, including a promised Minor Injuries Unitfor two decades?! During which time two of the Trustees have been busy gaining permission for hundreds of new homes elsewhere in Cranleigh?

Rumour has it that one of Waverley’s new head planning honcho’s – who has his own developer-led consultancy – has more than a passing interest in ensuring this one gets done and dusted as quickly as possible. If that is the case, all the more reason to delay until September to ensure that a very bright light is shone on this very shabby, shoddy and distinctly shady deal!Grab the public’s money – Grab parish land – make promises you cannot keep and run?






Who wants to be Canterbury’s new​ Belle?


Having failed to trouser a seat at Waverley Towers, Ewhurst resident Angela Richardson has set her sights higher in her efforts to climb the greasy pole. She wants to become the parliamentary candidate for Canterbury in Kent.

Deserting us so soon Angie? Surely not – there must be a Waverley by-election in the offing soon, patience dear girl, patience. Everything comes to those who wait. And… you have definitely shown you are a determined lady in waiting.


The  – “I’m backing Boris” Tory activist who has clocked up more steps schlepping around the country for the Conservative Party than Strictly’s Anton Du Beck, is stepping over the Surrey/Sussex borders looking for greener pastures. Not too much green left in your area then Angela?

She says: “Having overseen a campaign of unparalleled intensity and dedication by candidates in the run-up to the recent electoral wipe-out of my Guildford Borough Council colleagues, as well as narrowly missing out in the Waverley Borough Council Ward I was contesting to Lib Dem opposition who didn’t even campaign, I can assure you that our Association definitely got the message.”

We hate to tell her, but it was the Rupert Bear scarf wot did it for her! Not those lazy LibDem hunks, who didn’t get off their bunks. Still  – if you had been seen to be backing the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust in its ruse to trouser planning permission for a Care Home – instead of a Hospital – you too could have scooped up those 30 vital votes in the blink of an eye Angie. That will teach you to serve the residents who elected you to serve the interests of the parish council rather than serve at the altar of the developer devils, dear Angie. – No doubt you will learn how it all works when you get to Parliament. We wish you luck.

Here at the Waverley Web, we see also see that Ewhurst’s belle is backing Boris. Bit rude given how Anne Milton and Jeremy Hunt are her Bezzies?  Or, perhaps not? Perhaps she, like us, thought  Fit Flops was a pair of shoes until Jeremy Hunt came along. No doubt you were as pleased as the residents of Dunsfold to hear on the BBC Surrey yesterday Angela – that he is keeping his options open on the application before Surrey County Council for shale drilling for oil/gas in Dunsfold?   Apparently, he has a lot of friends in Chiddingfold and Dunsfold who are in the industry who are advising him!!??


Do you want Godalming to have a bigger say in​ how it develops​​ in the future?


Please note: Conservative councillor Jan Floyd-Douglass voted against the Charterhouse application. She says she listens to both sides of the argument and then votes, even if it is against officers recommendation to refuse. Wow! even the new Tories have minds of their own now?

And … more of a say on ALL important  issues affecting the town for which some residents have adopted the soliloquy – “Godawfulming?”

Do residents want to reinforce the case for making the way ahead for Godalming planned by Godalming again?

Just so that the Waverley Web can put you in the picture – until Godalming’s New Guard took over – the previous administration, that just happened to be almost all Tories – couldn’t be bothered to debate Godalming matters, either at the town or parish councils.

WHY? We hear you cry?

Because – quite simply – why bother – when the REAL decision-makers were holed up in Waverley Towers and as most of them were borough councillors why give up an evening’s bridge/golf/TV at two meetings – when you can score a hole in one.

But thankfully soon – Godalming’s time could come again…

 Soon the Godalming Town Council, led by Cllr Paul Follows,  could well be considering planning applications and other matters of local importance.

Yipee – is that the sweet scent of democracy we smell wafting over Godalming for the first time for many years?


Screen Shot 2019-01-22 at 13.27.43


Please, Sir? We want more.



The effect of this was seen in the controversial decision last week to let Charterhouse School build on Green Belt to construct two new boarding school houses for girls because the charitable organisation needs more pupils – in other words, it needs more dosh.

Green Belt development isn’t allowed unless there are exceptionally strong reasons for it, and Godalming Town Councillors were against it. They believed the reasons given were not “exceptional” and were certainly not “strong.”

But it went through the Waverley planning process because the town council doesn’t have a say. When it was considered by the Joint Planning Committee it was passed by 14 votes.  (We believe these were all Conservatives plus some Farnham Residents and the Liberal Democrat Chairman. (However, it is almost obligatory for the Chairman of the Joint Planning Committee to vote for everything – even holding Easter at Christmas if the planning officers’ says so.)

Saying YES to everything comes with the job.

However, there were five (Labour, Green and some Lib Dems opposed to the scheme), with one Lib Dem abstention.

 So – whoops there goes another green field!

Screen Shot 2019-07-02 at 19.26.23.pngNow one Godalming Cllr who has recently arrived on the scene doesn’t believe this is sensible.

He says:  “Although I’m perfectly happy working with Farnham and Haslemere councillors on Waverley issues,  I believe it’s unreasonable to expect them to take a keen interest in Godalming. Clearly, Godalming Town Council should recover a say in planning, and if the town’s proposed Neighbourhood Plan is approved by a good majority, that’s a vote of confidence in them and it will help them recover a proper say. So Let’s vote yes.”

Screen Shot 2019-07-03 at 10.20.43.png

So  “Do you want Waverley Borough Council to use the Neighbourhood Plan for Godalming & Farncombe to help it decide planning applications in the neighbourhood area?”

If you want to read the full plan, it’s at


Dunsfold aerodrome is one of​ two Surrey sites​ chosen to be among 17 other garden​ villages to be built across the country.


Here’s Friday’s Post.

BREAKING NEWS – You heard it here first.

Housing secretary James Brokenshire yesterday announced almost £3 million of government funding for an extra 19 garden villages across England, which he said have the potential to deliver 73,000 new homes.


visualisation of garden community plans for Dunsfold Aerodrome in Surrey.

A 10,000-home urban extension to Chelmsford in Essex, a 7,000-home settlement near Ashford in Kent, controversial plans for a garden community on the green belt in Tandridge, Surrey, and a “dementia-friendly” village in Rutland, are among the proposals that have been supported.


A total of £2.85 million has been pledged by the MHCLG to “support the development of plans for housing”, with each project receiving £150,000 “to progress planning applications and specialist reports needed before homes are built”.

The 19 new garden communities are:

Berinsfield Garden Village (South Oxfordshire District Council) – the potential for up to 2,300 homes south of Oxford.
Borough Green Gardens (Tonbridge & Malling Borough Council) – an opportunity to deliver up to 3,000 homes.
Burtree Garden Village (Darlington Borough Council) – a project led by Hellens Group with the support of Darlington Borough Council, aiming to deliver up to 2,000 homes.
Chilmington (Ashford Borough Council) – aiming to deliver up to 7,250 homes south-west of Ashford.
Cyber Central (Cheltenham Borough Council) – aiming to deliver up to 3,000 homes and around 8,000 jobs, primarily in the field of cybersecurity.
Dalton Barracks (Vale of White Horse District Council) – a free-standing proposal with the potential for up to 4,500 homes south of Oxford.

Dunsfold Park (Waverley Borough Council) – an opportunity for up to 2,600 homes in the form of a new free-standing settlement by 2032.

East of Biggleswade (Central Bedfordshire Council) – led by UK Regeneration, a free-standing project proposing up to 1,500 homes east of Biggleswade.
Newton Abbot Garden Community (Teignbridge District Council) – the potential for up to 6,800 homes that provides the opportunity to regenerate the existing town centre.
North East Chelmsford Garden Community (Chelmsford City Council) – the potential for up to 9,850 homes.
North Dorchester (West Dorset District Council) – proposal for up to 4,000 homes to the north of Dorchester.
Shapley Heath Garden Village (Hart District Council) – the potential for up to 5,000 homes by 2043 in the form of a new, free-standing settlement.
Skerningham Garden Community (Darlington Borough Council) – a project led by Skerningham Estates with the support of Darlington Borough Council, aimed at delivering up to 4,500 homes.

South Godstone Garden Community (Tandridge District Council) – up to 4,000 homes on the green belt.

South Seaham Garden Village (Durham County Council) – led by Home Group, a free-standing project aimed to propose up to 1,500 homes.
St George’s Barracks (Rutland District Council) – a new, free-standing settlement proposing up to 2,215 homes near Rutland Water. This has been described by the MHCLG as “a dementia-friendly community village” that “would allow the elderly to live safely and independently in their own homes”.
Threemilestone Garden Village (Cornwall Council) – proposing up to 2700 homes to the west of Truro.
West of Elvington (City of York Council) – up to 3,339 homes as part of a free-standing garden community.
Whetstone Pastures (Blaby District Council) – a free-standing proposal for up to 3,500 homes in the heart of Leicestershire.
In his speech, Brokenshire said: “These new communities stretch from County Durham in the North, to Truro in the south-west. Together they have the potential to deliver 73,000 new homes.

“We welcome the new homes these projects will bring, but this is about so much more than ‘housing units’.

“It’s about supporting local areas that have the vision and drive to create great new places – with all the facilities, green space and transport to make a community that will thrive.

“And I’m really pleased that our plans include a specially designed community that would support the needs of people with dementia, as part of a new Garden Community at St George’s Barracks in Rutland.”

The new garden villages are in addition to 24 garden cities, towns and villages already supported by the government.

Here’s what one of our followers commented in our earlier post on   Dunsfold Park.

I first got involved in Dunsfold in 2006 when I attended a public consultation in Cranleigh. As Guildford and Waverley Friends of the Earth, we spent the better part of 2 years undertaking due diligence on the proposal which at the time was groundbreaking in the sustainability concepts it sought to introduce. As part of this, we approached the then Head of Planning campaigns at Friends of the Earth – Hugh Ellis. We didn’t know at the time, but Hugh had been one of the main authors on the Labour government’s first stab at an eco-town policy which was issued in the form of Planning Policy Guidance (PPG). Hugh agreed that the scheme ticked all the boxes in the PPG and deserved support and came down and spoke in favour at the planning inquiry on behalf of Friends of the Earth.

However, as we all know, the first scheme for 2,601 was rejected by the SofS at the time (John Denham) although I was told that it was a pretty close run thing. The day the announcement was made that Denham had refused it was also the day the masterplan won a prestigious national planning award, the Francis Tibbald award, beating the KingsX regeneration scheme.

So the garden village concept was already embedded in the scheme from the start.
In 2010 Hugh Ellis left Friends of the Earth and became Head of Policy at the TCPA – where he still is incidentally. He has always been passionate about sustainability and climate and at TCPA from 2012 onwards he evolved their garden town/village policy. I gather he remains in touch and supportive of Dunsfold to this day.

Denise – this Garden Village award is based on a government policy rather than the TCPA. The government version is a watered down version of the TCPA. It’s a bit soft but it isn’t bad. See this link

The second scheme is based on the award-winning masterplan of the first in terms of layout. However, ideas about sustainable building, particularly in terms of renewable energy, have evolved and there have been extraordinary technological changes since 2009. Although Dunsfold still aspires to be an exemplar in this respect – I have had this assurance from Trinity – there is uncertainty over the optimum model for an exemplar development to pursue and no examples of truly sustainable new settlements in the UK. It seems to me that everybody working on other new large scale schemes in this country (as opposed to individual houses or small schemes) isn’t much further forward than where Dunsfold was 10-12 years ago.

Dunsfold already has a 2MW solar farm and a 2MW anaerobic digester but these alone don’t produce enough to power the new settlement on renewables. So I hope some of this money will be used by Waverley to support Dunsfold in building an environmental exemplar which we think is going to require rooftop solar, either PV or thermal (or both), heat pumps and a micro-grid. A micro-grid is where instead of having every house directly connected to the national grid they are all connected together and then go through a central connection – this allows for cost-effective local energy balancing and energy storage. I think there is already a micro-grid there on the industrial side but I hope that we can see this extended to the residential.

It would be an even greater benefit (both as an exemplar and for future residents) if the micro-grid could be ‘community owned’ which would be entirely in keeping with Ebenezer Howard’s original principles in Garden Cities of Tomorrow, originally published in 1902 and on which the movement is now loosely based.

Backward Point, Ewhurst.


Despite huge local objection- Waverley Planners recommended approval of an additional nine homes – three of which are “affordable” added to 32 already granted to  Miller Homes in ‘Cherry Tree Lane’ Ewhurst.

Hey, Ho, where did localism go? Certainly not to Ewhurst!

However, Members of its joint planning committee said an emphatic No to the scheme.

Despite the fact that the access road has already obliterated a mature hedge screen between the new development and bungalows in Gransden Close – Waverley Planning ‘so-called experts’ are “satisfied’ that another nine homes can be built. So there could now be 42 homes on the site of a single-storey bungalow at Backward Point, Cranleigh Road. Ewhurst.

Carole Cockburn said: “Quite frankly I think this is awful and I remember going to the site visit, standing in the road and thinking – really – but we lost the first phase on appeal, this is a poor design, is cramped and overlooks nearby homes. This is overdevelopment of the site trying to squeeze in another nine.”

A suggestion from officers that obscure glazing could be used to prevent overlooking brought a fierce response from Cranleigh’s pocket rocket Elizabeth Townsend.

“If it overlooks other properties, then we shouldn’t approve it, not rely upon the use of obscure glazing!”

She wanted to know? Why wasn’t play space included, why should the village recreation ground provide the play space? Had the impact on the public footpath been assessed?  Where were the pedestrian refuges the narrow access road? What about the damage to mature trees?

Why are we being asked to approve something that doesn’t meet the county council’s parking standards asked Cllr Steve Cosser? On and on, members’ objections rolled, why were huge properties overlooking small bungalows causing loss of light? And why was this developer cramming even more properties onto the dangerous access onto the Cranleigh Road?

The ward councillor Val Henry said: “You would have thought county highways might have raised an eyebrow over this 45 homes to the hectare development, but it appears to have washed its hands because Cherry Tree Lane is a private road!”

Objections like these below counted for nothing when officers recommended approval of the application on Wednesday.

  • Ewhurst is served by a reasonable road from Cranleigh but only small track roads from Shere and the road to Horsham and Ockley are not up to standard for additional units.
  • –  Water supply unreliable
  • –  Power supply unreliable.
  • –  Inspectorate has turned down other developments in Ewhurst at appeal due to local housing density
  • –  All the development in Ewhurst is in one area.
  • –  The Council refused a 13 unit scheme on this site due to poor access.
  • –  The site access is totally unsuitable.
  • –  There is no passing place on the access track.
  • –  Many vehicles will have to park on the road.
  • –  The track is named Cherry Tree Lane which could encourage drivers to try to use it as a cut-through when it is, in fact, a cul-de-sac.
  • –  The access track is also a public footpath.
  • –  Overdevelopment
  • –  This development will result in demand for a new school, doctors surgery, waste tip and road rebuilding.
  • –  Loss of privacy and light to neighbouring dwellings.
  • –  Emergency vehicle access is not suitable.
  • –  Out of character development.
  • –  The allocation of houses for Ewhurst has been met and exceeded.
  • –  Thames Water has already stated that they cannot supply water to the proposed development of 58 homes at Firethorn Farm.

Screen Shot 2019-06-03 at 10.10.44.png


Two of the “affordable homes” with gardens of 10 metres are smaller than the National minimum space-standards – but this standard has not been adopted by ‘Your Waverley.’

Screen Shot 2019-06-03 at 10.11.41.png

Ewhurst Parish Council has raised “Serious concerns over the restricted access to the site from Cranleigh Road, believing that by adding another nine units to those already consented would generate even more traffic onto a bell-mouth where conflict already exists. It believes the development is “cramped” and out-of-character with the density of properties in Ewhurst, and will overshadow the property “Sixpenny Buckle.” The tree cover will be compromised and there is inadequate parking, which could lead to cars parking elsewhere on the development making it difficult for emergency and delivery vehicles and which could lead to vehicles parking on the recreation ground.  The one-bed property has NO amenity space.

The application was refused by 17 votes to 5.

Then,  Chairman Richard Cole,  who voted for the application, asked the officers: “Are you content with the reasons?”

WW asks – have we another Isherwood in the making?

Will converting shops and offices to residential be prevented in, ALL our towns and villages, by ‘Your Waverley?’


Screen Shot 2019-06-27 at 10.37.43.png

The area covered by the Article 4 direction.

The Council has taken a hitherto, little used planning rule, to prevent Haslemere’s  Beacon Hill high Street from becoming just another residential area.

But when will this apply to the rest of the borough?

The Council’s senior planning committee has made an Article 4 Direction – to protect the commercial area of Beacon Hill from losing its retail and commercial space.

Following consultations with residents, and land and property owners on their concerns that conversions from commercial to residential were robbing the area of much-needed business space, Article 4 was invoked and is now in force.

Under existing GOVERNMENT planning legislation – legislation that has been heavily criticised by many, property including shops, offices and premises used for light industry, warehousing or distribution can be converted into homes without planning permission. So there was little the council could do stop the loss of high street premises. This has already resulted in many hundreds of former businesses premises becoming homes under their permitted development rights. And there was damn all the council could do about it!

Cranleigh Parish Council and Haslemere Town Council were among the first to be consulted, as both had made numerous representations to Waverley about the loss of shops and offices in their high streets.

Now the direction has been invoked, anyone wanting to do this in Beacon Hill will require planning permission.

Waverley’s Interim head of Planning Paul McKim said although high streets needed to adapt to modern shopping, working and leisure habits, those changes needed to be managed.

“The council, business communities and local residents need to be involved in shaping the future of our rapidly changing high streets. “We hope the Article 4 Direction will prove to be an effective tool in helping to shape our town centres. We will be watching Beacon Hill with great interest and if the model proves successful, we will, in partnership with town and parish councils, consider this approach in other areas.”

You can read it here:





Wouldn’t it be great if someone recognised these teenagers and dobbed them into​ the Police?​


If so – it may even save someone’s life one day soon? And it could be yours or a member of your family?

Screen Shot 2019-06-29 at 09.23.16.png

The three teenagers pictured above spat at, punched and struck a man’s thigh with the flat side of a knife during an attack on a train travelling between Milford & Godalming last month. May 18th to be precise.

The Police have just released the CCTV footage following the incident which took place at 12.35am on Saturday, May 18, as the train travelled between Godalming and Milford railway stations. 

WW can’t help wondering why it took so long to release the CCTV footage, but there may be a good reason?

Although the man in his 40’s who was attacked did not require any medical attention, he did push them off the train when it arrived at the next station, which bearing in mind recent fatal attacks was brave or was it a foolhardy thing to do?

However, what may have seemed a prank to these boys, may result in more serious behaviour, in future so if you recognise any of these faces – tell the police now.


BREAKING NEWS – You heard it here first.


Screen Shot 2019-01-19 at 10.50.06

Screen Shot 2019-06-26 at 19.25.44.png

It is among 19 sites around the country to be awarded the accolade.


Could the take-off & landing where once-The Harrier; The Vulcan, The Red Arrows, Battle of Britain Memorial Flight and planes for the Berlin Airlift took flight, soon become a Garden Village runway? 

Screen Shot 2019-06-27 at 10.28.56.pngThis decisions – announced today – will provide a significant boost to the local economy in due course. And will, no doubt, be pounced upon by Jeremy Hunt, the local MP, as a feather in his own cap, as he continues to campaign for the premiership – despite the fact that he was initially opposed to the Dunsfold Developer’s plans, even going so far as to appear, at the behest of SDPNT (Stop Dunsfold New Town), at the first public inquiry to protest! He, together with Guildford MP Anne Milton, had the application called in for refusal, however, it was approved by former S of S Sajid Javid after a delay of many years.

This decision is a huge accolade for the Flying Scot and his team at Dunsfold Park who have been battling, for some 16 years, against local NIMBYISM and the entrenched views of the likes of…

… the unlamented Mary Orton-Pett (AKA Mrs MOP), former CEO of Waverley BC, who was virulently against development at the former aerodrome; Richard Shut-the-Gates and Robert Know-less, former Leaders of the Council, and narrow-minded former parish councillors, Betty Aim-less, the late unlamented Brian Ellis, OJ (AKA Charles Orange Esq) and Nick Pidgeon; not to mention Clerk & Chief Money Handler on behalf of POW, Crystal-Tipps Weddell; Bob Lies and Sarah ‘Udders’-Sullivan, of POW, and Anthony Isaacs, of CPRE, who all did their absolute damnedest to prevent this particular development on their doorsteps.

Oh to be a fly on the wall when Lies & Isaacs learn about this!

It is a truly magnificent feather in the cap of Tom Horwood, CEO of ‘Your Waverley,’ and former leader Julia Potts (who shall, henceforth, no longer be known as ‘The Potty One’).  Elizabeth Sims, former Chief Planning Officer who together, took collective responsibility and, went out on a limb to save Waverley from itself, by grasping the nettle and embracing the benefits that a new settlement on a brownfield site at Dunsfold Park could offer the Borough.

A case of better late than never!

Meanwhile, SHAME on those who didn’t buy into this scheme and, in the process, have brought this Borough’s countryside up to its knees in concrete through their obdurateness, selfishness and sheer bloody-mindedness.

The conferring of village status on Dunsfold Park will help to ensure that this development fulfils the vision that the Flying Scot set out for it when he first taxied down the Dunsfold runway back in 2003: to create a genuine 21st century village with not only homes but jobs, community shops and other essential facilities in an attractive, landscaped environment. A sustainable community where people will be able to live, work and play, as opposed to the bland housing estates being built by other developers locally and the ‘ghetto’ which OJ sneeringly and publically suggested Dunsfold would become – and of whom it can now be said:

Never in the brown field of conflict has one man been so wrong about so much!

It’s not often that the Waverley Web praises developers – in fact, this may even be a first for us – but credit where it’s due. We cannot help but admire the perseverance, stamina and sheer bloody-mindedness of the Flying Scot who refused to be deterred or demoralised by the worried-well-to-do and has steered a once derelict and deserted airfield to garden village status in the face of almost overwhelming odds.

It is an achievement that the generous-spirited amongst us can all be proud of …

But we await with interest how the …

Let’s Crap-on-Dunsfold Aerodrome-from-a-Great-Height Sorry Advertiser …

… chooses to portray this latest piece of good news to emanate from the brownfield site. Surely, even they, cannot turn this into a bad news story … but, if past experience is anything to go by, we won’t be holding our collective breath!

Thousands of new homes to be built in Guildford’s countryside.


Protesters at the council's offices
Image captionThousands objected to the new policy

The new housing policy was backed by Guildford Borough Council in the face of thousands of objections. Opponents believe it permits unnecessary development on rural land.

The council said the plan, which allows the building of 10,678 homes by 2034, would meet rising demand that could not be met in urban areas.

Some 2,000 homes are earmarked for the former Wisley Airfield site, with a further 1,500 at Blackwell Farm off Hog’s Back and 800 in the town centre.

The council said the following villages had been removed from the green belt: Chilworth, East Horsley, Effingham, Fairlands, Flexford, Jacobs Well, Normandy, Peasmarsh, Ripley, Send, Send Marsh, Burnt Common, Shalford, West Horsley and Wood Street Village.

Opponents can lodge a High Court appeal. Perhaps the Campaign For The Protection for Rural England should be launching another Judicial Review?

Georgie Paulson and his mum Katharine
An 11, year-old  joined his mother at a protest against the plan

They were among protesters who gathered outside the council’s offices ahead of the vote. Saying they were so concerned about the loss of the green belt. “We are custodians of the countryside and we need to safeguard the green belt,” she said.

Presentational grey line

What is the green belt?

English countryside

Green belts were introduced after World War Two to stop cities from sprawling and countryside being spoilt. There are tight controls on building in these areas.

The government says the “essential characteristics of green belts are their openness and their permanence”. It is made up of both greenfield sites, which have never been developed, and brownfield sites, which are often on disused or derelict land that needs to be cleared.

About 13% of England is now covered and the 14 green belt areas are meant to be permanently protected – and are only reviewed in exceptional circumstances.

However, it has reduced in size by about 100km2 (39 square miles) since 2010, primarily due to councils adopting new planning policies.

The “Guildford borough local plan” has been years in the making, but opponents criticised the decision to hold the key vote just before elections, which could shift the balance of power in the council.

Former Conservative council leader Paul Spooner agreed the timing was “unfortunate” but said that delaying until after elections would mean “we have to go through the process again” with an estimated delay of two to three years.”On that basis, it makes sense to move forward now.”

In March, a government planning inspector said the plan was sound and it was justified to build on some green belt land to meet a pressing need for housing.

Now – what do you say about this disgrace Jeremy?


Or, are you too busy climbing up the greasy pole and bashing Boris to care?

A leading doctor who served on an NHS England group tasked with designing new child cancer standards says that changes to soften the proposals were “insisted on” by its officials.

No doubt this whistleblowing consultant will soon be looking for a new job? The very same whistleblowers that our MP Jeremy Hunt former Health Secretary said previously, “I will protect,” but then reneged on that promise.

Just like he did on this one in Farnham. Where’s the Redgrave Jeremy? Ashes to Ashes – Dust to Dust? Like so many of your promises?

Screen Shot 2019-06-24 at 09.45.27.png


James Nicholson, a consultant paediatric oncologist at Addenbrooke’s Hospital, in Cambridge, has spoken out saying that the clinical reference group for children and young adult cancer services – of which he was a member – was threatened with its whole project to set new standards being dropped if it objected.

He said the group debated resigning en masse in protest over NHS England’s position. He said the national body was “standing in the way” of clinicians trying to improve care for children and said the wording of the standards being consulted on this month should be considered invalid.


Screen Shot 2019-06-24 at 10.05.23.pngDr Nicholson was present at a meeting in September last year where clinicians were told that the recommendation about co-locating intensive care services with child cancer units needed to change from “must” be present to “should”.

This was demanded, he said, by NHS England’s national cancer team, which is led by cancer director Cally Palmer, chief executive of the Royal Marsden Foundation Trust – a cancer centre which lacks an on-site intensive care unit.

Dr Nicholson said the CR  group, made up of expert clinicians from across the UK, only agreed to changes to ensure the remainder of the new standards were not abandoned. They insisted patients who were transferred from one site to another were monitored with new quality metrics.

He said: “It was very clear if we didn’t accept it, the service specification would either go no further or we would all have to resign en masse.

“I recall no one being happy with this change and the CRG was unanimous in thinking that a change from ‘must’ to ‘should’ was not appropriate.”

Last week HSJ revealed how NHS England had “buried” long-running concerns over the model of care in London. Former London medical director Andy Mitchell accused Ms Palmer of a conflict of interest and said he believed either she or NHS England chief executive Simon Stevens was responsible for preventing a 2015 report from being published and proposals for change going any further.

Claims that the CRG had been put under pressure were described by NHS England as “deeply unfair”, but it has said Ms Palmer will “play no part” in future decisions on child cancer services. CRGs are groups of clinicians established to shape standards for specialised services, which are commissioned by NHSE.

Dr Nicholson, who chaired the paediatric review element for the CRG, said Ms Palmer’s conflict of interest was not compatible with her role and the operating model at the Royal Marsden was “frankly absurd”.

“We were told by NHS England at a CRG meeting that this [the change from “should” to “must”] had been insisted on by the cancer policy team.

“There was a long discussion. One option discussed was mass resignation.

“We accepted that probably the only way of that service spec not being dead in the water – for all of the good changes that were still in place – was to let it go forward and hope in the public consultation there would be enough of a backlash to address it.

“It was a real compromise.”

He is no longer a member of the CRG, as the membership of all CRGs was revised early this year. He said the group felt resigning wouldn’t have achieved much but added: “We might well have been wrong. “It just seems complete nonsense when you’re trying to pull together a specification of what good care looks like that you can let such compromises slide in.

“It just feels like a slap in the face when a large number of experts from around the country who have contributed to this [standard] to make it better, and progress is slowed. It is truly depressing and it’s very demoralising.

“NHS England should be supporting us, not standing in the way and it does feel like they’re actually standing in our way.”

He said during engagement events outside London, clinicians were “incredulous that we would even ask the question if intensive care should be co-located.”

He said the model of care at the Marsden where children are transferred to St George’s Hospital for intensive care was “inappropriate” adding: “When you have a city as large as London, to have a service set up where paediatric oncology and intensive care is not co-located is frankly absurd and that is the view held by a vast majority of the profession.”

He said the risks were mitigated by the Marsden transferring children early but “it is not good quality care. For example, if they have a sick child which has leukaemia who ends up being transferred to St George’s for intensive care my understanding is they don’t have the same clinical trials open at St George’s and there is not the same oncology cover so they don’t get the same quality service”.

On Ms Palmer, he said: “I don’t think that level of conflict of interest is compatible with having any input into a service review which has an impact on your own service.” He added he believed an independent inquiry would be helpful if the issue can’t be resolved any other way.

“I would like to see the wording of the service specification reversed. I think there should be a recognition that those changes that were made in the service specification should not be regarded as valid.”

In response to Dr Nicholson’s comments, NHSE said it was grateful to all the clinicians for their effort and time in developing the proposals which are now out for public consultation.

An NHSE spokesman said: “All members of the clinical reference group signed off the proposals despite some obvious differences of opinion between various clinical views during their development. The CRG recommended clear safety requirements where some services are not on the same site, and that is exactly what is now being consulted on so everyone can again have their say.”

Objectors to ‘Your Waverley’ meeting any of Woking’s unmet housing need rocked up at The Court of​ Appeal …again!




POW’s back in town again
and CPRE’s got their back again
One more time
Here we go again
The Judge will listen again
We’ll be their fools again
One more time
We’ve been there before
And they’ll try it on again
But any fool knows
That there’s no way to win
Here we go again
They’ll break the bank again …

There they were again – the same tired old faces – fronting The Campaign for the Preservation of Rural England (CPRE) and Protect Our Waverley (POW) – beating their perpetual drum to stop the Borough of Waverley taking some – only some, mind – of Woking’s unmet housing need. Housing need that they claim is no longer required or wanted because the needs of the town have disappeared skywards!

Screen Shot 2019-06-24 at 18.47.44.png

All the regular Rumpoles piled into Room 71 (not Room 101!) to urge a panel of judges to remove 83 homes per annum from Waverley’s housing numbers, that were imposed on it by Government Inspector Jonathon Bore. If CPRE and POW succeed in their long-running battle, they could throw a hand-grenade into the Department of Communities and Local Government’s Inspectorate.

Er, why? we hear you ask in justifiable puzzlement.

Because both Mr Bore and a previous High Court Judge will have been found to have erred in law in how they applied Woking’s unmet need to Waverley. And the Inspector will have been found to have acted illegally by not adhering to the policy and guidance rules within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) when dealing with Part One of Waverley’s Local Plan.

And, if the Court of Appeal decides that they did err, it will remit the decision back to an Inspector and the whole process will begin all over again! Here we go again …

Here’s an example of just how Woking Borough Council intends to meet the housing need of its townsfolk:

Lawyers acting for the appellants – some of whom have been schlepping around the district, yet again, begging bowl in hand, whining for yet more money to continue to fight the so-called good fight – accused the Inspector of failing to seek up-to-date figures for both Woking’s unmet housing need and supply, saying his actions were both irrational and not adequately reasoned. They argued they had no wish to quash the Local Plan, but asked the panel of Judges to simply remove 83 homes per annum – a total of 2,400 over the plan period.

Although at times it appeared that the complexities of the housing numbers that the three local authorities were required to meet in Guildford, Waverley and Woking were under review, the Judges warned that this was not the issue before them! Their narrow remit was to decide whether the Inspector’s decision had been legally flawed when imposing some of Woking’s unmet need on the borough of Waverley.

Counsel for the appellants claimed there was a ‘clear legal flaw’ by the Inspector, who had not attempted to acquaint himself with robust figures for Woking’s unmet housing need or its supply coming forward. He should not have imposed a higher number of homes on the mainly rural borough of Waverley – a figure that had necessitated an uplift in homes for Waverley’s small rural villages.

Waverley’s new Deputy Leader, Paul Follows, heroically sat throughout the hearing as the three judges asked the appellants’ barrister why he believed the Inspector had acted illegally? Where was the Leader we wonder?

‘Are you saying the Inspector did not do what the NPPF says he must do?’

He responded with a resounding Yes! “There was up-to-date and relevant information regarding Woking that the Inspector should have had regard to. If he had taken account of that he almost certainly would have refused Woking’s unmet need.”

Said the Judge: “But an Inspector does the best he or she can,” but Counsel maintained the Inspector had not done the best he could based on the material before him and “applying 50% of Woking’s unmet need to Waverley was perverse and irrational.”

One judge asked if the appellants wanted the Local Plan quashed and sent back to the Secretary of State to re-determine? But Counsel for CPRE/POW said they wanted Woking’s unmet need removed from a borough which boasted 92% of its countryside in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty or Great Landscape Value and 60% Green Belt and reducing its housing figures from 11,200 to 7,500 was “significant.”

Unsurprisingly, the hearing ended without a decision being made – that is for a later date. In the event that the judges, in their wisdom, don’t find in favour of CPRE and POW’s argument no doubt the next stop on the POW gravy-train – which is being funded, at vast expense, by Tax Payers – will be another room in another Court …

All aboard! All aboard! Don’t miss the train, boat or plane!

Meanwhile, the concrete mixers are on manoeuvres!



Is this how to acquire planning permission if you are/or were a legal officer at ‘Your Waverley​?


Screen Shot 2019-06-24 at 09.14.58.png

The actual application under discussion begins at 1 hour 18mins as ‘Your Waverley’ streams meetings for hours before meetings take place.  A previous application which included permission for a new building in the garden was allowed earlier. Just listen to what the objectors have to say.




In three short paragraphs, Waverley’s new Deputy Leader has put the kybosh on CPRE and POW’s fantasy of working with the new Waverley Dream Team in order to quash Waverley BC’s requirement to take a share of Woking BC’s unmet housing need.

In less than a month since taking over at Waverley, Councillor Paul Follows has met with Anthony Isaacs and Bob Lies, (CPRE & POW’s head honchos respectively), listened to their arguments, assessed their plan and found it wanting.

No surprises there then!

Whilst the Waverley Web entirely understands the New Broom’s desire to be seen to be listening to the voices of dissent, it didn’t take him long to detect and highlight the holes in the dastardly duo’s argument, which leaks like a colander.

No doubt Messrs Isaacs and Lies won’t take a blind bit of notice of Councillor Follow’s pithy assessment of the risks they are running. Why would they? After all, it’s not their money they’re frittering away on feckless and frivolous arguments. Not on your nelly! It’s ours – the poor, beleaguered Waverley Council Tax Payers’!

And for those of you who are still under the illusion that these bumbling buffoons only have the best interests of the residents of Waverley at heart, let us attempt to reset your perception:

• CPRE & POW claim they are seeking to remove the Woking unmet need number and not quash the whole of the Local Plan.

• The problem with that, as Councillor Follows pointed out in his recent letter to them, is that the Court is highly unlikely to get involved in setting housing numbers.

• The Court of Appeal’s task is simply to consider whether the Inspector and, subsequently, the High Court Judge erred in law in how they applied the Woking unmet need amount to Waverley.

• If the Court of Appeal decides that they did err, it will remit the decision back to an Inspector and the process will begin all over again!

Meanwhile, all reasonable and sensible advice leads to the conclusion that this high stakes strategy carries a very real risk of:

• increasing, not decreasing the future target
• strengthening the argument in favour of consenting the planning appeals against Waverley in the short term
• increasing the uncertainty that currently surrounds the draft Local Plan as a result of the appeals.

Of course most people – including councillors – are concerned about the housing targets and housing delivery in the Borough but the difference between them and CPRE and POW is that they aren’t engaged in a game of high stakes Russian roulette with other peoples’ money!

Suffice to say if Messrs Isaacs and Lies’ great gamble doesn’t pay off they are going to be as popular in Waverley as skunks that have rolled in fox poo!

The Deputy Waverley leader’s response ( below). 
The hearing on Monday 24th June will be webcast here, so pull up a chair and bring some biscuits! The background of the case is on the Court site here.

Screenshot 2019-06-20 at 10.08.36


Was ‘Your Waverley’ entertained by Charterhouse School – just days before planners recommend its scheme to remove​ yet more Godalming’s Green Belt?


Could the playing fields of England soon be buried under another pile of bricks and concrete?

We have heard from a number of Godalming residents including John Mair and Steve that they are not entirely happy that ‘Your Waverley’ councillors are being ‘entertained’ by Charterhouse School. Not sure whether it is tea and biccies or drinks and nibbles – however, we digress. Suffice to say – the hard sell is on…?

With a planning officer’s recommendation to approve building shedloads of student and staff accommodation breaching yet even more green belt in Godalming, should councillors be getting up close and personal with the influential applicant. An applicant who may be just days away from –  tucking a planning consent for more student and staff accommodation under its belt?  The top public school which boasts the wannabe Prime Minister amongst its alumni? –

John & Steve think probably not.

But Deputy Leader Paul Follows, standing in for Waverley’s new Leader John Ward who is on a slow boat to ….? Is going along for the ride., for the reasons he sets out below. 

Says John Mair:

Screen Shot 2019-06-20 at 20.58.55.png


Screen Shot 2019-06-20 at 20.59.25.png





Just perfect timing eh! Cllr Follows? Surely not – just a coincidence we are sure?

At a meeting of Godalming Town Council earlier this week, at which there was a large public attendance – councillors voted by 7 votes to 4 to object to the application. Residents believe this development is only the start of a great deal more development planned by the school on the Broom & Leas site in Godalming. 


Radio Ga Gal speaks up for Our Jeremy as he fights to cling onto the greasy pole?


National Radio are clearly phoning round local Conservative Associations for comment on leadership and any swivel-eyed loons that are left to vote for them…
Here’s the audio!

Chairman of SW Surrey Conservative Association Denise Le Gal, who was recently ousted from her Farnham seat on Waverley Borough Council takes part in a radio phone-in to speak up for Prime-Minister contender The Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP for SW Surrey. 

She argues Hunt speaks up for the 48% of those who voted to remain in the European Union and is confident he can do the deal.

Ms Le Gal said at a public event after the Referendum that she had urged her children to hang on tight to their Canadian passports, just in case they wanted to leave the country.

During numerous interviews this week Jeremy Hunt claims he is an MP in a marginal constituency!



At last, the CPRE has come up fighting for a town in Waverley.


Support claims for a Haslemere development are just ‘greenwash’ claims The Campaign for The Preservation of Rural England.

DEVELOPERS eager to build up to 180 new homes in a Haslemere Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) are under fire for ‘greenwash.’

Redwood property developers have recently concluded a public consultation on pre-application plans to increase the draft site allocation in Waverley Borough Council’s Local Plan part two from 50 houses to 180 at Red Court Estate in Scotland Lane.

No surprise there then?

Part Two of the Local Plan was pulled by the former administration before the elections – for more work to be carried out, mainly due to the uproar over sites included in the plan in Haslemere. The draft Part Two is expected to be considered by Waverley’s Overview & Scrutiny Committee in September then goes forward for adoption by Full Council in November for publication in March 2020 and adoption in November 2020!

But supporting statements to promote the Haslemere scheme have angered local residents, and organisations, including Haslemere Town Council, for implying they are in favour of the proposals.

Responding, Redwood said: “We sincerely apologise if any inference of support has been mistakenly aligned with any local community members or groups.”

First to publicly object in a letter to the Haslemere Herald on May 30, was the town’s eight-strong confederation of schools, which stressed it remained officially neutral.

Haslemere Town Council and neighbourhood plan group Haslemere Vision have now gone public to deny they have endorsed pre-application housing proposals. The Waverley District of the Surrey branch of Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) has also denied suggestions it supports the scheme.

Surrey CPRE director Andy Smith said: “This is a prime example of ‘green wash’ whereby developers pretend that their schemes are environmentally sustainable when in reality they are anything but.”

Anthony Isaacs, CPRE Waverley District chairman added: “The developers of Red Court claim in their literature that the proposals to build 180 houses on green fields designated as an area of great landscape value and/or within the Surrey Hills AONB ‘conform and align absolutely’ with CPRE policies on access to National Parks and AONBs.

“Most emphatically we do not share that view.”

Note : The CPRE and POW ( Protect Our Waverley Campaign Limited) will appear in the High Court on Monday as they have appealed the elements of the 5 November 2018 decision relating to Policy ALH1 of Local Plan Part 1, and its allocation by the Local Plan Inspector to allocate the borough 50% of Woking’s unmet housing need.

  •  The application to appeal had been allowed on the grounds of importance of the principle, and the grounds for appeal was a novel argument not previously considered at the Court of Appeal and was not in itself an indication of the likely outcome of the appeal.

You couldn’t Adam and Eve it could you. Duplicitous Hunt at it again. Wasn’t it JH and Anne Milton who called in the Dunsfold Park Application. The very same application on the largest brownfield site in the borough that was eventually approved by Sajid Javid, and then contents by the CPRE & POW in the High Court – again – and again…

Screen Shot 2019-06-19 at 14.30.41.png

Is there trouble at Farnham’s Mill?


Just one month into ‘Your Waverley’s new administration and as they say in Yorkshire ‘There’s trouble at Mill.”

juliapottsparachuteNo sooner had former leader Julia Potts unhitched her harness and settled into her new seat at Dockenfield Tilford, and Frensham, than the sparks, started flying within the Farnham Residents’ Group. The very same group that claimed it was changing the face of Farnham, by supposedly kicking out the Tories and taking out Politics with a big …


Is the group that prides itself on being ‘non- political’ already showing signs of being just as political as all the rest of the political parties that have held power at Waverley Towers? We hope not.

With John Ward a former Pi**ed off Tory at its helm, it certainly appears so. The pompous, bumptious, self-important John Ward, whose records show only månaged to attend about half his Waverley meetings last year, and even then spent most of his time Screen Shot 2019-06-17 at 11.51.11.pngdealing with his phone messages, has, no doubt,  already brought a smile to the Potty One’s face.

In his efforts to ‘take over Farnham Town Council as its Mayor; Waverley Borough Council as its leader’ and the Farnham Residents’ as its Chairman – JW appears to have let a little success go to his head? Or, is it to his wallet?

It is fairly obvious to all Waverley Web readers that the man who founded Farnham Residents’ has been thrown overboard from the Good Ship Ward? Could it possibly be that Cllr Jerry Hyman,  has spoken out too often on the environmental concerns that dog Farnham – its air quality issues – the Blightwells fiasco – the harm being carried out in Waverley’s name to the Special Protection Areas of which Farnham so jealously guards and of which it is so proud?

Let us all hope not for our good town’s sake? Because the man who over-turned the large scale voluntary transfer of Waverley’s council housing stock of which “YW” is now so proud, deserves recognition, not retribution. The man who founded Farnham Residents’ who actually rocks up at meetings, has ably chaired them, and speaks up for the whole borough of Waverley and not just Farnham – hasn’t even received a crumb at John Wards’s round table. In fact, it looks to us here at the WW that Excalibur has been thrust in his back?

Or was John Ward a Tory plant – perhaps destroying a party from within is much easier than from without?

He didn’t even manage to turn up for the first Western Area Planning Committee – sending his apologies – again…

Screen Shot 2019-06-18 at 08.48.25.pngScreen Shot 2019-06-18 at 08.48.58.png

2007 – 2016 Served as a Conservative.


The latest load of nonsense from the CPRE.


You know the one – Campaign for The Preservation of Rural England? The outfit that has been granted leave to Appeal against the High Court Judge’s decision to allow the Local Plan Part 1 to properly get off the starting blocks?

Today’s edition of you couldn’t make it up comes from Crispin Truman, Chief Executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE). Saying he wants more affordable homes, preferably on brownfield sites. Maybe, if he’s so worried about the lack of affordable housing in rural areas,  he should speak to his minions at CPRE Surrey and tell them to stop opposing housing on brownfield sites!

In the meantime more and more and even more applications are pouring in from developers eager to build over OUR  countryside in Waverley.

Be careful what you wish for!

Ms Smyth, whilst we always welcome your erudite and learned comments on the post above, unfortunately, the references to policy and legalise are a bit – well, to be honest, a lot! – above our pay grade and we’d really appreciate it if you could explain the points you are making in terms that we laymen can easily understand.

In the meantime, if anyone knows the answer to the question in your final para about Dunsfold Park, please can they tell us because we really need and want to know. Frankly, the thought of DP Phase II not going ahead and yet more of  Farnham. Godalming, Haslemere and Cranleigh and everywhere in between being concreted over have us running for the hills … because let’s face it, that’s the only place the developers won’t be building if DP Phase II gets thrown out with CPRE/POW’s dirty bathwater! Never mind all the rain we’ve been experiencing over the past week … it will be raining concrete in  Farnham and the other towns and villages if that comes to pass!!!

Help us if you can, we’re feeling down
And we do appreciate you being round
Help us get our feet back on the ground
Won’t you please, please help us …

Frustrated railway passengers slam changes to Godawfulming’s railway station.


There was a great deal of angst and much discussion about controversial changes to Godalming’s Listed Railway Station recently when ‘Your Waverley’s’ central planning committee met. However it appeared, but there was damn all anyone could do about these and future proposed changes.

Fact is, it appears British Rail can do more-or-less whatever it likes to the Grade 11 listed building under its permitted development rights.

According to council planning officers, the railways companies have more rights than the rest of us.

The scheme under consideration was for Listed building consent for internal and external alterations to provide altered level at the side access door, CCTV and remotely controlled door lock at Godalming Railway Station, Station Approach, Godalming.   However, this is only part of a more complex scheme for the station which was not under discussion by the new Central Area Planning Committee… Chaired by Cllr Richard Cole.


Screen Shot 2019-06-14 at 21.17.40.png

Although officers recommended approval – and councillors agreed to grant the application – they made their concerns over some of the future proposed changes loud and clear.

They didn’t like the idea of bollards being erected in front of the station – in regular use by passengers as a drop-off point, despite officers assurances that extra spaces would be provided in the nearby car park!

For completeness, the SWR has given fuller details of future works that fall outside the scope of this application but will be carried out later. These include:

  • Installation of a glass and aluminium/steel enclosure with roller shutter on platform 2 to the side of the existing side entrance;


  • Installation of three automatic ticket gates, one wide aisle, Station Control unit intercom receiver; customer information screen and heater; Relocation of two ticket vending machines with new canopy and repair of tarmacadam floor;


  • Removal of the telephone box and make good tarmacadam floor; Removal of two passenger validators;
    Removal of modern galvanised steel fencing and gate; Relocation of lighting column and station sign;


  • New bollards to provide a protected walkway between enclosure and station building;  Thus preventing drop-offs.


But it is the closure of the unpaid entry on Platform 1 that is causing such consternation for Godalming’s travelling public.

Entry will be prevented by the installation of steel fencing with intercome receivers.

Residents claim there will be insufficient ticket barriers inside the ticket hall and restricting access to Platform 1 will cause problems for existing rail users, and the new residents of Aaron’s Hill when that new development takes place. 

So there you have it, folks! – It looks like Godalming’s railway passengers who come from all over the Eastern villages might just find life a tad more difficult than it already is. However, Waverley’s new central planning committee members want officers to write to SWR outlining everyone’s concerns. Here’s what one traveller had to say…Screen Shot 2019-06-14 at 19.28.47.png

As mature trees face the chop in ‘Your Waverley,’ here’s what others are doing to​ stop the rape of precious woodlands.


In 2018, a leafy suburb in north-east England became a scene of devastation. Now Michael and Angela Green are leading a fight to prevent further destruction of their local parkland.

Read this and take heart, if you fear for the woodland trees where you live in and around the borough of Waverley. Because our planning officers are turning a blind eye to numerous breaches of conditions, including those imposed on ancient woodland, and trees covered by Preservation Orders. Particularly those butchered by developers in Farnham.

Recently Surrey County Council was forced to abandon a council meeting and meet elsewhere when 35 climate activists sang Police’s number one hit song: “Every Breath You Take.” 


They had been protesting outside the county hall as councillors arrived earlier that morning handing out flowers and letters to members asking them to “act now”.

They were singing the line “I’ll be watching you” repeatedly as they walked out.

Extinction Rebellion was asking the council to do three things: to declare a climate emergency; to divest its pension fund from the fossil fuel industry, and to refuse drilling licenses for oil companies in the county. One of which affects the Waverley village of Dunsfold.

Council leader Tim Oliver told councillors before the singing that he is setting up a working group to develop an environmental charter to include climate change issues. “As a county council we are clear as to our responsibility to our environment. 

“This group will also review the causes of traffic congestion which we know has a significant impact on air quality.

“I’m sure they will want to engage extensively with external organisations as they draw up a deliverable charter. Let’s see what we can do together to make a positive impact in this area.”

Speaking after the meeting, activist Chris Neill, from Godalming, said: “We were pleased that many of the councillors engaged with us outside the chamber and spoke positively, recognising Surrey County Council needs to do much more to address climate breakdown.

“However, it’s clear that they are not acting with the urgency that is required. We really don’t want to disrupt meetings but we have to do what’s necessary to draw attention to this very serious situation”

Claire Matthes, a mother from Haslemere taking part in the protest, said: “It goes against my personality to disrupt formal meetings but the times demand it.”

Meanwhile in County Durham “We call the events of February 2018 ‘The Happenings'” says Michael Green. “It was a surreal and shocking moment for us. Nothing like this had ever happened before.”

His voice shaking, Michael (a resident of Darlington, County Durham) is talking about the day in 2018 he went for a run and came across a scene of devastation. A beloved grove of mature trees in his home town had been cut down.

In a matter of days over 200 established native British trees, including beech, oak and ash, were felled to make way for new housing development.

Devastation caused by tree felling in Blackwell, Darlington

Michael shared his story at Darlington Groundswell,one of Friends of the Earth’s climate action events. 

“It looked like a hurricane had struck. I was so distressed I came home and went straight to bed,” says Michael. “I couldn’t bear to tell my wife Angela.”

Native British trees are home to wildlife

The grove of trees was on the site of a former golf course, itself on medieval farmland, in the Blackwell area of town. As long as anyone can remember they marked the tranquil entrance to this historic market town.

The trees were felled during the ‘Beast from the East’ snowstorm when temperatures hit lows of minus 6oc.

Mature beech trees in Darlington were cut down to make way for executive homes

Does this scene remind the residents of Cranleigh of anywhere in particular? Or those living in Haslemere and Farnham?

Local people told how owls screeched through the night for a week, presumably unable to find their nests, and that a colony of hibernating great-crested newts almost certainly perished.

Ancient hedgerows and a well-loved woodland path were lost, and two ponds badly disturbed. 

That happened here in Waverley too – and the former Chief Planning Officer remarked – “they can always be replanted!”

Why trees are important

This tragedy for Blackwell’s residents shows how ideas of past and future can clash in communities across the country. And, it is happening to trees and hedgerows across our borough of Waverley.

The Georgian parkland surrounding the Blackwell Grange hotel – once the seat of the Baronetcy of the Havelock-Allans – has barely changed since the 18th century. But in 2012, news emerged that Darlington Borough Council had earmarked the former golf club site and part of the Hotel’s parkland for executive housing development.

One councillor in the community called the development “progress”.

Yet the woodland was cherished by locals precisely because it hadn’t changed. “We love the meadows and the parkland because they are timeless; the connectivity between these ancient green spaces, past generations and the present community is truly tangible,” says Michael.

We saw a community in crisis. A community which was bereaved.

Why we need trees in our lives

The Council ran a consultation in 2015 with some local residents, and planning permission was granted.

However, Michael and his fellow campaigners from the #LoveDarloTrees network say that the planned scale of the destruction of the woodlands was not made clear enough.

The group is also disappointed that the consultation excluded residents living on the opposite side of the road.

How often have we seen this in Waverley? Too frequently. 

Michael and Angela Green talk to protestors against tree felling

Of course, it’s too late for the felled trees. Many local residents have changed their daily routes to avoid having to repeatedly see the devastation.

And the story doesn’t end there. Darlington Borough Council still plans to open up the remaining historic parkland for development. 

Georgian parkland surrounding Blackwell Grange in Darlington is under threat from housing

This area has a wild woodland, a pond, a grove of ancient lime trees and a ‘ha-ha’, a type of sunken fence which was used in 18th-century landscaping. A listed red brick wall runs along the northern limit of this parkland. 

But the #LoveDarloTrees network is determined not to lose this cherished green space.

Save the Trees

The group has carried out an ethnographic study to understand how local people feel about their community green spaces. They’ve continued to tie green ribbons and posters to trees, and the community has held a number of protests.

The group has even managed to track down Sir Mark Antony Havelock-Allan QC, the 5th Baronet of the family who once lived in the Blackwell Grange. Sir Mark has thrown his support behind the campaign to protect the parkland.

Friends of the Earth Darlington supports #LoveDarloTrees protest

Michael and Angela believe the loss has brought people together more than ever before in defence of a beloved landscape.“Residents have become rebels, voters to vandals,” laughs Michael.

#LoveDarloTrees is now campaigning for the remaining parkland to be turned into a permanently protected natural park for the whole town.

Celebrating Earthmovers

Michael and Angela’s efforts to save the remaining parkland were recognised with an award at Friends of the Earth’s Earthmovers ceremony in May 2019. The ceremony was held at Darlington Groundswell, Friends of the Earth’s regional climate action event.

Michael and Angela Green were awarded the David Gladwell prize for their tree campaign

Organised by Friends of the Earth and supported by players of People’s Postcode Lottery , Earthmovers Awards recognise the inspiring work of local environmental groups in their communities.

If you’re inspired by Michael and Angela’s work and would like to campaign for urgent action on matters related to your local environment, why not consider joining one of our new Climate Action groups?


Be careful what you wish for!




We at the Waverley Web have read Paul Follows latest Twitter postings with interest. Should Paul Follows spin the wheel?

Like many of our followers, we have welcomed the ‘new brooms’ at Waverley and their commitment to open and honest dialogue with the electorate, as opposed to the secret squirrel stuff that went on under the previous Tory monopoly administration. But …

Yes, of course, there’s a but! This is the Waverley Web and when have you ever known our spiders roll over and wave their little hairy legs in the air?

The but is that the new brooms need to be exceedingly careful that they don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater!

It’s all very well for Paul Follows to sit down with CPRE and Protect our Little Corner (POW) but this isn’t just about CPRE and POW and what they want. If Paul Follows wants to jaw-jaw (or, in this case, pow-wow – or do we mean wow POW?!) he will also have to jaw-jaw with ALL the stakeholders, not just CPRE and POW – just because the usual suspects shout the loudest doesn’t make them the only toddlers in the playpen!

Jaw-jaw is all well and good but it would be naive in the extreme for Paul Follows to assume that the new brooms at Waverley are going to solve the issues surrounding housing numbers by just engaging with POW and CPRE about them.

A review of the Local Plan isn’t within the gift of the Lib Dems, the Farnham Residents, CPRE or POW and whilst we would all like to see less housing cluttering up our countryside, the reality is there are VERY REAL RISKS that in lobbying for this review all these good-intentions could go horribly awry and the upshot could be that Waverley’s housing numbers DO NOT DECREASE and, instead, they INCREASE! Thanks-a-lot POW!

This isn’t a case of the only way is down – a review could go either way!

Like them or loathe them, the previous Tory administration at Waverley spent years with their heads up their … – oops! we meant to say, in the sand – denying that there was a need for any more housing in Waverley. They firmly believed that if they said No! No! No! And denied, deferred, delayed and procrastinated it would all go away or, as so often happened, be superceded.

But it didn’t and when, under La Potts’ aegis, she recognised and accepted that Waverley couldn’t and wouldn’t be allowed to continue taking the *iss any more and decided to grasp the nettle, she did us all a favour.

Why? Because that denial, deferral, delay and procrastination policy has cost us, the Waverley council tax payers, dearly. Not only financially but in concrete terms, because it is the reason developers and anyone with a paddock at the end of their garden have had – quite literally – a field day! With no Local Plan in place, it has been a developer’s and would-be developers’ charter to build on every green field, paddock and bit of redundant farmland they can lay claim to.

If Waverley BC, under the direction of Matthew Evans, Mary Orton-Pett (AKA Mrs MOP), Richard Shut-the-Gates and Robert Know-Less – not to mention POW’s mother, Stop Dunsfold Park New Town (SDPNT) – had accepted the inevitable and acquiesced to the Dunsfold Developer’s original scheme to build 2,600 houses at the aerodrome in 2009 not only would a great many of those houses now be built and occupied, Waverley BC would have been able to defend its green fields and belt and Cranleigh and Farnham – not to mention the villages of Awfold and Duncefold – would not now be turning into concrete jungles with housing estates popping up like mushrooms all over their formerly green and pleasant environs

At the end of the day, CPRE and POW are arguing about a measly 80 houses per annum. And in running that argument they risk another Inspector concluding that Waverley’s housing numbers are not too high but too low!

We, at the Waverley Web, have the greatest respect for Paul Follows and the Farnham Residents and their ambitious plans for the Borough but they need to bear in mind that it’s very easy to stand outside the tent and throw brickbats but it’s not so easy to be in the tent trying to reconcile the bickering factions and ensuring, in the process, they don’t all end up costing us yet more money we can ill afford and land we’d rather not lose!

Paul Follows and his colleagues need only look at the internecine battles that are going on in the Tory party and the Labour party at the moment and the damage that is doing to the country and take heed!

Should Paul Follows spin the wheel?


The WW will follow with its view later… watch this space. Well – you would be surprised if we didn’t.

followsspin.jpgPaul Follows, the new Deputy Leader of Waverley Borough Council is the Liberal Democrat Cllr for  Godalming Central & Ockford. Although he has represented that ward for only 18 months he has taken a huge interest in the whole borough during that time.

He says: “I have now returned from my meeting with CPRE and POW (which was as frank as I expected).
I pledged before the election that if by some electoral miracle we were running Waverley (or part of running it) I would get everyone in the room to talk – and very proud to have started that dialogue and it was acknowledged by all parties that would have been impossible under the previous administration.”

What I honestly want from this is a reduction in the housing numbers in the local plan (If you recall I voted against this plan in the first place).
That’s what POW and CPRE seem to want too. Where we had differences was how we go about that.

What they want:

to get a judge to quash the policy that gave us the ‘unmet need’ from Woking and thereby reduce the housing numbers.
Fine – in theory.
What I’m worried will happen:
If the court does that, the plan will have a gap in its figures that the court isn’t empowered to fill – and will refer it back to the competent authority (in this case Waverley) to fix it. Which would (we believe) force the plan to be reassessed under current constraints and variables – which everything I am seeing means actually a big INCREASE in housing numbers. CPRE and POW currently dispute this interpretation but to me, that is a huge risk.
– If successful, all the while we have not done that (and it would be a lengthy process) the plan would be materially undermined and subject to challenge and appeal from developers on individual planning applications.

What I proposed:

– stop the appeal, and the waste of money on all sides in entails;
– We commit to doing a proper risk assessment of what re-opening the local plan to reconsider the housing numbers would entail and crucially – if the numbers would be smaller or not. We would keep them closely involved in that.
– If it proved sensible to, reopen the plan.
– If we did that, also I would want then to reassess the affordable and social housing elements in full.
What they proposed:
– seek a deferral on the court case to give everyone more time
– That we share our respective interpretations of the housing numbers question.
Everyone has taken actions so…

… hopefully,

we will have a meeting

2. So what it boils down to now potentially is trust and seeing if something can be done before we run out of time (and I’m told the early court date was something the previous administration agreed which has set this ticking clock in motion).
I just want to ensure that what is a genuine attempt to help reduce the housing numbers does not make things worse by orders of magnitude because at the end of the day my first duty is to the people of Waverley.
Happy to answers any question on this update…

Screenshot 2019-06-11 at 22.19.24.png

Will they shunt the Hunt?


The WW is not quite sure why our Jeremy thinks 1.5m homes is going to appeal to local Tory members… here’s his manifesto folks

Screen Shot 2019-06-11 at 09.02.52.png

So where’s your promise to old people then Jeremy?

The old who have spent every penny they ever earned in a lifetime on their nursing home fees? Leaving just enough to bury themselves?

Who cannot get care at home unless they are in “critical need,”  have just had their free TV licence withdrawn for over 75’s unless they claim Pension Credit.

Cannot get NHS care in a nursing home unless they are literally on their last legs, and often not even then?

Are called “Bed Blockers” because nursing homes places cannot be found for them to leave hospital?

Are losing their trusted GP’s and are being asked to travel to find one? And, believe they are nothing more than a burden to the country by simply drawing breath and are losing the will to live!

Screen Shot 2019-06-11 at 09.46.02.png



Peep Bo – I’ve been waiting for this opportunity for a very long time Treesa!


Screenshot 2019-06-10 at 12.00.39.png

Jeremy Hunt actually just said this yesterday. You couldn’t Adam and Eve it could you?  He literally inherited the seat from his Aunty Virginia Bottomley. Or Virginia The Airhead Health Secretary as she was known in Parliament.

Marginal? Hardly!

Neil Sherlock and then Simon Cordon (both Lib Dem) had narrowed it to 861 when Virginia was the second most hated Health Secretary.. but South West Surrey a marginal, really?!

More dirt on Jeremy Richard Streynsham Hunt, here: