Why did our MP’s vote against providing school meals – and will Surrey mind the gap?


Angela Richardson's Boob with Boris

Now MP’s can claim the expense for the Poppy Wreaths they use for their picture opportunities. This picture appeared in 2019 on the Guildford MP”s Facebook page.

You can listen to Cllr Follows here:


Young Paul Follows – ‘Your Waverley’s’ Deputy Leader is not the only one questioning the wisdom of the Hon Jeremy and the Hon Angela’s recent No vote.

Many of us here at the WW were incredulous at your lack of compassion, as were many of our readers. This is not about politics – this is about children, who may be hungry. Winston Churchill said ‘ A nation that forgets its old – has no future.’ Well, we could say the same about the young. They are our future.

No sooner had the Hon Angie voted against extending free meals for those in need during the holidays than she was opening a new McDonalds in Guildford! Crass or what?

Our MP’s must be relieved that their  Government has just announced that they can now claim the huge expense of buying a Poppy wreath when they rock up to any Remembrance Day commemorations!

A question to both Mr Hunt and the Angie WHY did you vote No? Have you recently undergone a compassion by-pass? We recognise that with all your children being privately educated in schools where they tuck into the best fodder on offer, you many no fully understand how the other half lives? Or is it because you, like so many ignorant people around the country, believe that if you live in wealthy Waverley or Snobbish Surrey – the only thing you have to worry about is what type of gin to drink, or where to play bridge?

Wake up you guys – there are very real areas of deprivation and those areas are on your patch and are growing, faster than knotweed. Now we wonder? Will Surrey County Council stump up the cash like many other county councils in the country? Or will you leave it up to the borough’s and districts to mind the gap?

as Cllr Follows says – we need an explanation WHY?

Hundreds of thousands have signed a petition against using public money to support MPs’ food costs, amid the controversy over the Commons vote. 

More than 390,000 people had put their name to the appeal as of Friday evening.

The petition — called “No public money for MPs’ meals” — was set up after politicians rejected the proposal to keep providing free school meals to children in need during the holidays amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.

Its creator said she was inspired to set it up after feeling “angry” following the vote in the Commons



So here you have it! Cranleigh Nursing Home circa 2001/2021?



Here they go again… let the trumpets blow again?

All that bunkum about postponing its planning application for a Private Care Home in Cranleigh was just that… a load of tosh!

Although the costly appeal has been ditched. The planning application, which the Cranleigh Village Health Trust had hoped would be heard on 21st October – yes – this week – will now be heard – at a later date?

And, there were all those objectors – including the Group campaigning to stop the development in its tracks thinking that – together with the withdrawal of support from its key stakeholders, Uncle Tom Cobley and all the 20-year saga would end. No way – this saga will not be over until the fat lady sings? 

Read this :

Whose left to back a Cranleigh Charity’s bid to build a private care home?

Now Tetlow King Planning has written the following to Waverley Planners – seeking yet another delay. This comes to you complete with grammatical errors!

Dear Sirs,

Although we have been pushing for the application to be heard at the 21st October Eastern Planning Committee, we now believe it is unrealistic to make that date. We, therefore, ask that the application is heard at a later date.

The main reason for this is that the Integrated Care Partnership (ICP) have out of the blue with no warning, recently written to us stating that they have issues with their support, which we are seeking to clarify with them.

While the ICP’s very recent equivocation is disappointing, we remain fully committed to providing an appropriate form of health care for the local community, through Community Beds available at local authority rates, to the residents of Cranleigh and surrounding area. We are working to achieving this – still through the physical proposals as they stand in the application, but possibly using alternative organisations to the ICP (e.g. hospices, charities etc) who would use the beds that CVHT make available on the application site at local authority rates. There may still be a role for the ICP in this, as potentially one of bodies who use our beds. Nevertheless, the response from the ICP means that we will have to re-think some aspects of the structure for instance in the legal agreement and its mechanisms.

We are also awaiting your comments on the draft s106, our viability evidence and the appeal Statement of Common Ground. The late request in particular for the viability evidence also makes the October committee unrealistic.

I hope this is clear but please contact me if you require any further clarification. This should be resolved as quickly as possible.

Kind regards Oliver

Oliver Marigold BSc (Hons) DipTP MRTPI Principal Planner

So all the “free at the point of delivery” community bed promises made by the Charity- were like pie crusts easily broken.

As The Campaign Group’s leader Andy Webb (nothing to do with the Waverley Web) says: “You can fool all of the people, some of the time, some of the people all of the time – but not ALL OF THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME!

Tomorrow we will put the Campaign Group’s message on the Waverley Web.

Mention who dares the words – ‘Surrey Fire Fighters!’


Now there’s a brave man. Waverley Councillor George Wilson Godalming, Farncombe and Catteshall.

He who dared to whisper the words – ‘Surrey Firefighters’ after being warned by the head honchos at Surrey County Council – not to do so!?!

What a perishing cheek! 

Profile image for Councillor George Wilson

Cllr Wilson said as a member of the Waverley/SCC Locality Partnership he had received an e-mail from a council officer with a warning!

The message was clear. Don’t discuss anything to do with the Surrey Fire & Rescue Service. And! Don’t answer any questions from members of the public either.

Get the drift – The Surrey Stasi are on patrol? 

Cllr Wilson told ‘Your Waverley’s Full council’s Zoom meeting last night that he/they/us/ were to refuse to allow any representation or contact from Surrey’s firefighters.  Siting confidentiality issues connected to a dispute.

A dispute with –  our brave men and women firefighters? The ones that beat a path to our doors in the blink of an eye, day or night to quench the flames, or drag us from our smashed-up cars. Or even act as first responders to save our lives from heart attacks? Yep folks those are they! The reason being that Surrey County Council is having a spat with the men and women who help us to sleep soundly in our homes and they don’t want us talking about it!  Because we are just voting fodder – get it? Pay your rates, put up shut up and certainly don’t stand up for anyone.

Cllr Wilson said he had concerns about the fire services manning and coverage issues that could put Waverley’s residents at risk, particularly when it was being asked to build more and more homes.

“In fact, I would like to hear from our professional fire-fighters. And as I do not wish to see our stations not fully manned I want assurances from the county’s Fire & Rescue service that this will not be the case.”

As it stands, if a member of the pubic raises the issue with us- will they be told there is a trade dispute, and it wouldn’t be appropriate for us to discuss the matter further!”

 “Does this council feel that an attempt by Surrey to stop us discussing changes in fire cover in Surrey is valid? Isn’t our remit to protect our residents? Because I think it is undemocratic and lacking in transparency were we not to do so. Anything that puts the lives of our residents at risk is most definitely our business and should be discussed in an open forum. -Will you support me in this?”

Leader John Ward said the council most certainly would!   Surrey’s attempt to prevent either Waverley or its residents from speaking up on important issues would not be tolerated. The Wellbeing Overview & Scrutiny Committee would certainly be discussing it.

“However, whilst however senior another council may consider itself to be in terms of its own importance Waverley would not be guided by what another council tells us.”

So there you have it, folks. If you are a local fire-fighter and want to get in touch with Cllr George Wilson – here’s his e-mail address: But, whatever you don’t tell him indoors! Or likely you will be looking elsewhere for work. Or it could be – as the song goes –  burn, baby burn when you gonna learn to put out that fire?

Mobile:  07508 839242

Bus. email:  george.wilson@waverley.gov.uk

Really? Surrey claps its care-workers one day and cuts their pay the next!


SHAME ON YOU SURREY COUNTY COUNCIL! Give up your attendance allowances, give up your travelling expenses and your special responsibility allowances and help the people who do the REAL work?
Surrey County Council’s care workers have received a pay cut for weekend work as COVID-19 continues to strengthen its hold, including in ‘Your Waverley.’
Surrey care workers, who until now were paid a higher rate for the unsocial hours they worked in the homes of the vulnerable and the elderly throughout the early months of the pandemic, have had it withdrawn.
 As Covid cases increase, including parts of Surrey now facing a second lock-down, pay for the stalwart workers who willingly risk their lives to care for the vulnerable will not be paid for the extra work they do at weekends.
Pay enhancements were introduced in April to reward staff for the extra work they took on during the pandemic.

Unison is considering industrial action as care home staff employed by Surrey County Council are no longer receiving more money for working shifts that involve weekends, late nights and bank holidays.

Enhancements were introduced in April to reward them for the extra work they took on during the pandemic but were withdrawn earlier this month, 

UNISON branch secretary Paul Couchman said:

“Although always seen by the council as a temporary measure, for me it doesn’t make sense to take it away now, with cases increasing.

“They’re still going to need staff to step up to the plate and cover for people who are shielding and self-isolating.

“Whilst most residents have shown their support by joining in the clapping of appreciation  it seems the county council is unwilling to recognise the continuing sacrifices care staff are making.”

Nursing home worker Justina Faltado (Tina), who worked in a private nursing home here in Farnham, paid the ultimate sacrifice when she died of Covid-19 in May, aged 54.

She is among other care-workers of a similarly young age who have died after contracting the virus in Surrey. 

The council agreed to continue to pay enhanced wages if the evening and weekend work is overtime, but not when part of normal rotas.

A care worker doing a seven-hour shift on a weekend or bank holiday and finishing at 10 pm will receive less than £80 before tax.

Duncan Eastoe, Unison rep for Mallow Crescent, said: “This is a real kick in the teeth.” There have been three positive cases among residents at Mallow Crescent, a Guildford residential home for adults with learning difficulties, but no cases among staff.

Mr Eastoe said: “Social distancing is incredibly difficult, you just can’t do it when you’re shaving someone or making sure they don’t fall over in the shower.”

A few of the staff are over 50 and have underlying conditions, so it is down to their colleagues to share the load, he said.

Whose left to back a Cranleigh Charity’s bid to build a private care home?



SIMPLES! The Cranleigh Village Health Trust!


 The charity formed to build a replacement HOSPITAL for the eastern villages – with publicly fund-raised money – skulks away – to find yet another cunning plan to build on formerly owned public land it bought for £1. Meanwhile, key stakeholders are dropping off its list faster than the fall of Autumn leaves.

On Thursday evening Cranleigh’s village leaders were the latest and the last of a long-line to ditch the plans for a 64-bed private care home for anyone from anywhere, and an accommodation block – for health workers from the outer boondocks. 

Cranleigh Parish Council has been licking the wounds inflicted on it by its predecessor’s crass decision-making. The cash-strapped council has sought legal advice on how it can get its land back and is continuing to do so, though it went behind closed doors to consider its next legal steps.

In a brilliant slide presentation by Council Clerk Beverley Bell on Zoom she spelt out the complex history advising councillors of the present state of play on both the current planning application and appeal against a previous refusal. Although the Charity – Cranleigh Village Health Trust (CVHT) states the schemes are halted, which has brought letters of objection to a halt… 

This is not the case – both are going ahead – and the latest scheme could be heard in November and the appeal in January. 

Andy Webb, the leader of the Campaign Group opposing the 20-year HOSPITAL saga, which has morphed into something unrecognisable to the donors who raised £1.8m, asked a string of questions. He was joined by former nurse Cathy Gould who has headed up the team’s efforts to seek a Charity Commissioner investigation! Although they represent many thousands of residents and donors in the eastern villages – the charity refuses to respond. They now want round-table talks with Cranleigh Parish Council and the Trust?

 Chairman Liz Townsend recognised their concerns and promised that the council would do its utmost to answer their questions during the meeting that followed. However, matters of a legal nature concerning the Covenant on the Paddock Field (the proposed development site) would be discussed in private, so as not to prejudice its position.

The Clerk presented a series of slides revealing some of the answers:

  • There was no longer support for the scheme from the Integrated Care Partnership!  Royal Surrey; SCC; Surrey Heartlands Trust and the Care Commissioning Group! * slide 1

  • There is no support from Surrey County Council! * slide 2

CVHT confirmed on 19th September: That the residential accommodation block will have no commercial or legal link with either HC-ONE or the 64-bed-care home! CONFUSED?

And there were we just a few short weeks ago told by the Chairman of The Trust Robin Fawkner-Corbett that it had no signed-up provider for the care home either? Does white man speak with forked tongue?

Could multi-millionaire care home operator Chai Patel still achieve his cunning plan?

It’s official. The Cranleigh Village Health Trust has NO partner for its bid to build a new Private Care Home.

So there you have it, folks. During the hour debate and votes that followed – Cranleigh Parish Council decided it WILL NOT support the building of a residential accommodation block or a private nursing home on land it sold for £1 in return for a playing field. It would also provide the Government Inspector with all the latest updates from the Integrated Care Partnership and Surrey County Council which revealed there was NO support for the scheme.

It reiterated its call to the charity to discuss the return of the land-based on an Agreement made between them * Slide 3.

WW Link: As another campaign begins to stop a Cranleigh Private Care Home being built parish leaders call for the return of village land.

The Charity might just as well have said: Stuff you! Slide *4

To sum up: there is now NO SUPPORT from any of the key stakeholders in the toxic project that has split Cranleigh asunder from:

Cranleigh Parish Council; Waverley Borough Council; Surrey County Council Adult Social Care; The Surrey Heartlands CCG; The Integrated Care Partnership – which includes The Royal Surrey County Hospital; Cranleigh League of Friends; The Cranleigh GP Practice; or The GP Federation; mental health; Community CCG’s; voluntary sector organisations; and… last but not least the thousands of people who signed Andy Webb’s Cranleigh Community Board petition and the many hundreds of people who have objected to the latest planning application.

What more does the charity need to halt this divisive and unpopular scheme which has divided the village?

OUR ADVICE. When you are in a hole – stop digging!

However, it is not completely ‘Billy No Mates.’ Abstentions came from three parish councillors. These included Hannah Nicholson of the defunct Cranleigh Community Board and now Cranleigh Conversations; Rosemary Burbridge of the “I need a care home for my husband;” and George Worthington who abstains from anything to do with the project leaving residents’ to wonder WHY WHEN he never declares an interest?


Some really helpful COVID information from ‘Your Waverley.’


Cllr. Paul Follows – Godalming Central & Ockford  Deputy Leader of ‘Your Waverley,’ who still manages to keep smiling – keep calm and carry on. We salute you.
As many of you will be aware, the government recently changed its Covid threat rating system to a new three-tier status, with the lowest being Medium. One part of Surrey (Elmbridge) has just gone to stage 2 (High) but for now, Waverley is Medium.
If we all continue to do our bit we can hopefully stay that way! 👍
But what do the new tiers mean?
See the infographics below:
Cllr Paul Follows
Deputy Leader, Waverley BC
Leader, Godalming Town Council
PS: please don’t shoot the messenger, I am just trying to keep people informed about a pretty fluid set of government policies and Comms!

Nobody says it better – than the Farnham Herald.


The King of Buy-To-Let has his say on housing numbers.

Well! He would, wouldn’t he? Because if the Waverley Borough sinks under a pile of concrete he won’t be wearing ‘Boris The Builder’s’ boots! Jeremy Hunt MP for SW Surrey, just might for fear of losing his seat, finally put his vote where his mouth is? However, on the other side of the borough, MP Angela Richardson has already warned the Guildford and Villages, voters… 

“To be careful what they wish for.” As they may end up with Guildford becoming a ‘high rise town.’ So she’s backing Boris – because if he asks her to jump – she shouts out – “how high.”

Jeremy Hunt who opposed building on the largest brownfield site in the borough of Waverley, and has sat back for years watching our countryside disappear.

And here’s what the man, who wants to fill Jeremy’s boots has to say: Paul Follows;  deputy leader of ‘Your Waverley’ who recently revealed the efforts the new coalition has made to increase the numbers of affordable homes in the borough. A task which will be made more difficult if the new Government White Paper is voted through.


How ‘Your Waverley’s’ housing honchos just ‘Kept Calm and Carried On’ during COVID.


http://Screenshot 2020-10-15 at 10.39.17.png


A wake-up call to MP Angela Richardson and all who sail with her.


Alfold is Full come back in 2032… Please?

If only everyone took as much notice and was as concerned about Alfold as Denise Wordsworth. The virtual newcomer is passionate about the Surrey/Sussex border village.

Denise Alfold


Dear Alfold Parish Council,


I am writing to YOU but copying in random MP’s/Councillors that I have never met and quite possibly never will –  until election time – so just thought I would try to be a little more inclusive.

 I know we are a tiny Village – with a tiny voice – but sometimes I think we need to  Shout-Out. We are all concerned about COVID -19. However, life goes on and so do developers who hope that no-one will notice whilst we are preoccupied with the pandemic that the Government has issued a White Paper. A document that says put your land into 3 tiers Good, Better and BEST –  Bit like COVID really!!

WW Link: A few things you should know about the government’s new planning White Paper.

There is little to address the concerns of villages like ours. Villages that are unsustainable with NO: Doctors/Dentists/Schools/or decent shops within walking distances. Everyone that moves here will have to DRIVE. Our roads are rubbish and we have NO TRAIN STATION  within 10 miles … apart from fairy fantasy ideas of re-establishing the old train Network…


We have multiple applications in this little Village that INSPECTORS regularly allow on appeal because the borough doesn’t have a 5 year Plan.

WW link: That man in Bristol has been busy dumping homes on Alfold – again! So it’s OK to DUMP Housing on this LITTLE village because the Borough doesn’t have a 5 year Plan??  Why stick it all here in. Cranleigh/Alfold/Dunsfold ??  

 It is Wrong – But it is EASY!  Dunsfold was the biggest Brownfield site (DISPUTE)  and the rest of the Borough said, ‘YES not in our town.’  So Waverley put the majority her in the eastern villages with a Minor A road A281 to Guildford/Horsham.

Our little semi-rural village is being bombarded by developers hoping that no one will notice – and they are right. No one does because they are suffering from FATIGUE – and have lost the will to care. Even the developers forget they have development rights as they appear to be LAND- BANKING!

This is the sort of feedback I get from people that genuinely care about the village – but have simply lost the will.

I told this person – I was fed up too – however, I keep trying as I do care about this village.  But, he has a point not everyone is an anal-retard like me who spends a ridiculous amount of time looking at this stuff.  I also told him I was giving up!  But I can’t! We moved here in our 50’s for our dog and a better life.  Alfold is a wonderful Village despite limited facilities,  which is fine for us, but hardly fine for people with young families needing to commute to London or other towns. There are no Trains and bus services are so limited as to be worse than useless.

This is the latest list of applications for our Village of 450 Homes (2011 Census) which I am afraid takes us so over the limit that it is ridiculous.

When a TOWN has shops doctors, Trains etc that is fine. Our Little Village doesn’t.  There is  NO Get GREEN BELT protection because we are COUNTRYSIDE BEYOND THE GREENBELT. This means we are Rural and do not need URBAN SPRAWL protection – but obviously, we do –  as Government Inspectors seem to think it is fine to give our small village over 200% of the allocation that was designated in the Local Plan. It is time to get angry about this now and I am afraid the village needs others’ support as they have lost the Will and NOBODY cares.

Well, I bally well do – so about time our MP’s started looked at US and doing something (Given the Covid Problem) If that is an issue – Pause all Planning applications until they can be taken seriously!  This is not Rocket science is it?

It’s  about time that Westminster and Surrey recognised these issues and until you do – I will certainly look forward to voting elsewhere next May – It saddens me but I see no other way. You have allowed a beautiful village to be screwed over by developers and we have more coming and no-one knows anything about it – Watch out WILDWOOD GOLF COURSE!


Denise Wordsworth


How to get a BEM in ‘Your Waverley’ in three easy lessons.


Angela Richardson Offshore tax evasion
… no, not the Outer Hebrides but Outer Hindhead and Haslemere!
Life Lesson No 1

1.1      Ensure you are a TORY with a Capital T.

1.2      If you are a borough councillor, always keep your head down – unless, of course, you happen to absolutely have to bestir yourself on account of the pesky locals, who helped get you elected – and now want their just reward by demanding you look into a controversial planning application on your patch!

1.3      Sit on as few committees as is humanly possible and, by all that’s holy, keep your comments strictly limited to parochial issues.  And, whatever else you do, don’t involve yourself in the stuff of other people’s lives – eg, anything to do with Farnham or Godalming!

Most certainly not Cranleigh, unless of course, you want to support a Private Care Home on public land with public money!

Life Lesson 2

2.1      Leave the council whenever it suits you.  Everyone understands you need to support your local coffee shop, and do the odd jobs,  … well, maybe not now we’re all working from home on Zoom!  And, of course, you need to do the weekly shop at Waitrose, leaving the delivery slots for the elderly and vulnerable.  And, of course, you need to get your roots touched up and your dry ends trimmed with another lockdown looming.  God forbid, you have to resort to dying it over the bath again – your bathmat still hasn’t recovered from that unfortunate incident during the March lockdown.  

2.2      And, as long as you pop back into the chamber when the Tory-Tossers are having trouble finding a local candidate and ensure you don’t go around rocking the Tory boat, by disagreeing with the Party, all will be well.  Just follow Noah’s example in these dire times and remember that the animals went in two-by-two.  Otherwise, you risk being swept away in the flood when the day of reckoning comes – as it surely will!

And last, but certainly not least:

Lesson 3

3.1     Ensure you stick as many leaflets through local letterboxes as you possibly can, regardless of how many Louboutin trainers you wear out in the process!  What price vanity?  For and on behalf of Ewhurst resident and local MP, The Hon Angie – she of the Rupert Bear scarves, not The Queen Vic  – that’s a whole other story! – and the unforgettable Leprechaun outfit – who could forget the Leprechaun?!  No, this is The Hon Angie, who, even before the ink was dry on her acceptance of office, was telling former colleagues:

If you play your cards right I could get you an MBE.

We wonder if all those really deserving souls in the eastern villages, who have given their lives to public services in one way or another, could or should have any faith in the honours system if all you have to do is rock up to parish and borough meetings and become a Trustee of The Shottermill Recreation Ground Trust to get a BEM?

Eat your heart out Carole Cockburn and all those other Waverley Councillors who have been slogging their guts out for donkey’s years. Who have rocked up at every council meeting known to man and have produced not one, but two Neighbourhood Plans. But who, sadly, no longer appear to be singing from the same hymn sheet as their new choir mistress.


Is the Hon Angie helping Bumbling Boris prepare the ground for a behemoth unitary authority? Or is she busy helping to bury another algorithm now her Tory heartland is revolting?


Is the Hon Angie helping Boris prepare the ground for a behemoth unitary authority?

November earmarked for the county council to decide on drilling in Dunsfold.


The Dunsfold drilling decision that was to have been held in October has now been delayed until  November.

Delays have been the order of the day for the UK Oil & Gas’s controversial scheme to drill on the Loxley Well site near Dunsfold.  Postponements began in 2019 and have continued ever since.

The decision on plans to drill two oil and gas wells near the Surrey village of Dunsfold has been delayed so many times now it is hard to remember exactly how many?  UKOG put in the application in April 2019. The proposals were originally expected to be decided by Surrey County Council in June, then August 2019, but a decision was postponed until September –   October –  and then November of that year. ‘Your Waverley’ objected to the scheme on numerous grounds – including the fact that it has declared a climate emergency. The gloves were on for Your Waverley’s new Rainbow administration​ as it Declares A Climate Emergency.

 The scheme was finally heard and refused at a catastrophic Zoom meeting in September  2020. When an amateur outfit of Surrey County Council’s planners made a pigs-ear of a virtual remote planning meeting. 
Councillors narrowly refused UK Oil & Gas PLC’s bid to appraise the well on land owned by an Alfold man – farmer Ashley Ward. The September 2020 hearing refused the scheme. But this decision was later ruled invalid. An investigation into complaints about the meeting, held virtually, concluded that irregularities arising from technical difficulties would…


“render any notice of refusal unlawful”.

So here we go again…

UK Oil & Gas application in Dunsfold – Refused…for no

The proposed site sits almost on the doorstep of Waverley’s highly acclaimed Government-backed garden village – soon to boast circa 3,000 new homes. In fact, it appeared that if approved, the garden villagers – could literally have oil/gas wells in/under their back gardens.

The second hearing on the application by the county council’s planning committee had been expected on 22 October 2020. Now the council says that a committee report by planning officers couldn’t be completed in time for the meeting to go ahead.

The next scheduled planning committee is on Friday 27 November 2020Link to the meeting.

The officers’ recommendation will be published a week before the meeting. We understand November meeting will also be held virtually.  However, the county wallah’s aren’t going to risk another debacle like the last.  The chairman and key council officials are not expected to take part remotely but will be in the same room at county hall. Phew! that’s a relief!

Link to DrillOrDrop page on Dunsfold

Section of Dunsfold boreholes UKOG

Continue reading

Is the Hon Angie helping Boris prepare the ground for a behemoth unitary authority?


Pretty damn sure she is.

But, as she said about the concerns Guildford residents have about the new housing targets that could be coming their way if ‘Bob The Builder’ Secretary of State for Housing Robert Jenrick gets his way. 

“Be careful what you wish for,” 

 She recently told the amazing Guildford Dragon that if Guildford doesn’t  accept more homes in the countryside around Guildford they may end up with ‘high rise.” Watch it, Angie! Start telling your Tory voters that their treasured town may soon end up looking like Woking, and your stint at Westminster could be short-lived!

Regular readers will know that we certainly aren’t fans of La Richardson – she of the Rupert Bear scarves and unforgettable Leprechaun outfit (who could forget the Leprechaun?!) – but, regrettably,  the dishonourable Anne Milton former Conservative MP threw her toys out of the pram – and stuck two fingers up to Boris & Brexit, as a result, he threw her out of the Party and didn’t drape one of the most hard-working and highly respected MP’s Guildford has ever had, in ermine.  Standing as an Independent didn’t scupper the Tory Tanker either! However, Angie is now in post having helped fill the Tory coffers both in her constituency and centrally she surely earned her reward and is now a PPS to the beleaguered Gavin Williamson.

The MP for Guildford has spoken out for the first time recently revealing a hidden desire to see the County of Surrey become a behemoth Unitary Authority swiping out in its path to autonomy all the 11 other boroughs and districts. Some of whom cover large towns like Guildford and Woking – and other more rural borough’s such as ‘Your Waverley.’ Well, she would, wouldn’t she? She didn’t get where she is today without doing the government’s bidding. Look where that landed her predecessor Annie Milton – spending more time with her family – and serving the community by answering their e-mails?

Ms Milton must be seething to hear that the Hon Angie – who is getting brickbats for not dealing with constituency work, hinted she didn’t receive a handover of local casework from the former MP for Guildford and Villages! Really? Maybe Annie needs to get her Gun? The Hon Angie claims most of her good works are carried on” behind the scenes.”

It was also striking to hear that she knew that the Surrey County County Elections will be going ahead in May 2020 long before it was made public.  Because of course she has been kept regularly informed of the selection process for all the new Tory candidates by her Guildford  Conservative Association colleagues. Perhaps, before re-selecting Cranleigh’s little Povey the local association will need to find him first.

 She even spoke about the county council with the Royal “we.” Does the MP for Guildford & Villages really believe that the Tories have a divine right to rule for ever-more in Surrey?


Our Little Andrew Povey. Surrey County Councillor for Cranleigh and villages. 

The WW understands the cry’s have been going out at local parish councils.

 “Has anyone out there seen our little Povey?

Because not only has he repeatedly failed to rock up at parish councils on his patch, he never even bothers to send in a report.




As Blightwells continues to rear its ugly head the opening has been delayed – again.


The controversial redevelopment scheme’s opening has been set back from March 2021 until July 2021.

Farnham Cllr Andy McLeod told Waverley’s Executive this week that another new team – headed by another new CEO had taken over management of the retail and housing scheme, and was making “a fresh start.”

It would appear to us here at the Waverley Web that developers Crest Nicholson changes it’s head honchos more often than one of our team’s blokes changes his socks!

However, onwards and forever upwards goes Blighwells – the result of a 25-year partnership between CNS, Your Waverley and Surrey County Council (SCC). With our money!

SCC heard that the scheme had lost yet another business. Ask Italian had gone into liquidation – which now leaves it with no restaurants. Only M & S Foods, Seasalt and Reel Cinemas were still hanging on in there. The Cinema was expected to open sometime in August 2021.

“We discussed possible rentals of the shops and it is, not a wonderful picture,” Cllr McLeod told his colleagues,”

However, Crest Nicholson was confident the shops would be let over a two-year period – and never expected that they would be filled straight away, he said.

However, here’s what the Farnham Society thinks of how Waverley’s Tories have changed the character of a much-loved market town. Article published in June.


The Farnham Society’s planning committee chairman, David Howell, reviews the state of the Brightwells development. 

September 2020

I’ve been hearing from various quarters that Farnham residents have expressed surprise and bewilderment at the increasing height and dominance of the Brightwells buildings adjoining public spaces, notably on Dogflud Way, East Street and above the Sainsbury’s South Street car park. I thought I would give you a summary of what the development brings.

The Society’s position

The Farnham Society opposed the proposals from inception. We were appalled at the size and scale of the scheme and objected strongly every time the terms of the Crest contract were altered in their favour. For example, the decision not to retain the Gostrey Centre on site. But the old Waverley administration continued regardless.

The residents expressed their thoughts about the use of the site through a survey in the Farnham Herald before the Development Brief was prepared in 2000, twenty years ago, but the Brief completely ignored their opinions. In 2016 the Society was involved in launching the campaign to seek a Judicial Review, questioning the viability of the scheme and predicting the lack of take-up of retail space, given current trends in the high street.

Support from both the membership and residents was magnificent and more sympathetic alternatives to the scheme were suggested, all to no avail. The Farnham Theatre Association fought and lost their battle to save the Redgrave Theatre.

But we are where we are, we still dislike the development intensely but want some good to come out of it for the people of Farnham.

Current status

You may not need reminding that Surrey County Council has invested in excess of £50 million in this development. We are paying for it. The current Waverley administration has reported that the borough council will probably never make any money out of it. They have a chance if all the 25 retail units are let as soon as they are available and remain let. To date the only interested parties are M&S Simply Food, Reel Cinemas, Ask Italian and Seasalt. The Society predicted this years ago. The Crest Nicholson brochure boasts 8 restaurants. Are they sustainable in the current climate?

I haven’t analysed the area of accommodation still available in the development, but my guess is 75% which equates to 72,000 square feet. To put that into perspective, the Argos building has a total area of 7,500 square feet, Water Lane Sainsbury’s 80,000 square feet.

So, where does one start? The largest building I think, which is D8 and then continue anti-clockwise around the site looking at the buildings visible from the road or public access space.

Brightwells CN Plan 03 09 20

D8, Cinema and car park

This is the largest building within the development and will be visible to anyone, anywhere, in the unfortunate position of having a view of the development. Currently, the greatest impact is from Dogflud Way. The building dominates the view for those approaching Farnham town centre from the east.

The southern end of the east elevation illustrated below is finished with a green ‘living wall’ – an anachronism you may well think.

D8 East Elevation 03 09 20 Green Wall TFS

The building has a footprint larger than the sports centre and about 60% of Sainsbury’s Water Lane. Allowing for its four full floors, together with the lower ground floor car park, the building has approximately three times Sainsbury’s floor space. The capacity of the car park is recorded as 426 over ten levels.

“Access and egress from the car park are via a ramp from Dogflud Way. I saw overlay drawings several years ago and these showed the edge of the ramp within ten feet of the corner of the sports centre – the length of a classic mini.”

D8 East Elevation photo TFS

Photo illustrating progress at the beginning of September

There is a six-screen cinema in the building with a current provision of approximately 750 seats although I foresee the possibility of the actual number reducing to accommodate the luxury seats that Reel, the cinema operator, may decide to install. The building also houses no fewer than four retail units or shops most with additional space on the first floor. Ask Italian are currently taking unit RU5 which has first-floor space. There are a total of 33 flats within the building.

I have to say that I feel that the west elevation overlooking Brightwell House and Brightwell Gardens is a mess, see below. That’s my opinion. Some may disagree with me. Time will tell.

D8 west elevation photo TFS

D15, Affordable Housing

This is a three-storey apartment block housing 15 flats, mainly with 2 bedrooms. The flats have been acquired by Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing (MTVH) as affordable housing. The building extends right up to the boundary and dominates the car park serving Chestnuts, East Gate and the Clock House.

“There is no amenity space for the flats. In my opinion, it turns what was a reasonably pleasant, open, car park area into a fishbowl.”

D15 west elevation TFS

Elevation drawing and photo illustrating progress at the beginning of September

D6, retail shops and flats

The north elevation of this building sits facing East Street, adjacent to the entrance to the development and opposite the former Marlborough Head pub. Built over four floors it houses 11 retail units on the ground floor some of which have space on the first floor together with 42 flats with an even split between 1 and 2 bedrooms. There is no amenity space. Below a photograph taken earlier in September. The roof section of the building still has to be added so the building will increase in height a further storey. It already dominates the skyline, dwarfing the Marlborough Head.

D6 and The Marlborough Head pub 2

D14 and D1, retail shops and flats

D14 includes the Marlborough Head pub and extends back to connect to D1 forming an L shape arrangement which in turn faces Cambridge Place opposite Funkey Monkey Soft Play. D14 houses four retail units on the ground floor all with potential access to first-floor space. Crest’s press releases show Seasalt having taken unit 12, the one adjoining the Marlborough Head. This stretch of the development is two-storey and, I have to admit, is in keeping with the retained pub structure in height.

D1 D6 East Street Elevation drawing TFS

Elevation drawing of D1 and D16 on East Street

D1 is three storeys in its entirety with the ground floor providing three shop units. The first and second floors house a total of 16 flats, with an equal split between one and two bedrooms, the latter on the south side having views over the new ‘town square’.

The wall finishes are a real mish-mash, brickwork, painted render, slate hanging and timber boarding. Sorry, but it isn’t pretty, see below.

D1 South Elevation TFS

D21, retail units

This two-storey building has shop windows on all unattached elevations at ground floor level being fully glazed on the east side overlooking the ‘town square’. The rear faces Cambridge Place.

“Planning application drawings indicate a square vented chimney feature on the zinc pitched roof. Probably one of the more attractive buildings on the development in my opinion although probably better suited as a pavilion or seafront located building. Five retail units are allocated to it.”

D20, M&S and flats

M&S Simply Food will occupy the whole of the ground floor of this building. There is a smaller, so-called, mezzanine area which sits above part of the M&S space to the south. From recollection, this was the space that the Gostrey Centre was going to occupy or was included in their space. The north, east and south sides of the buildings are three or four storeys high around a residents’ shared amenity space at first-floor level which looks west overlooking the Sainsbury’s upper car park deck, see below.

D20 west elevation cropped

The building houses a total of 42 flats, a majority two bedroomed but with a couple of three bedroomed dwellings which extend up to the third floor. The four-storey parts of the west elevation totally dominate the skyline when you are in the car park. The building dwarfs the neighbouring Victoria Gardens, see below, the overlooking windows destroying its former feeling of calm and privacy.

D20 south elevation from Victoria Garden TFS

The west elevation will have a couple of brick finished chimneys trying to add a sense of domestic scale. The planning application plan drawing shows four lovely mature trees in the amenity space, which are in fact not shown on the landscaped west elevation.

D20 east elevation, tented B House

Photo illustrating the progress of the east elevation from the temporary bridge in September

D4B and D4C

As far as I can see these two buildings aren’t visible above the hoardings yet. Both are designated as purely residential. D4B houses a total of 39 flats, 14 one-bedroom, 18 two-bedroom and 7 three-bedroom. The four-storey building will tower above the 40 Degree building, and the sports centre glazed west elevation which provides light to the swimming pool. Several of the upper floor east facing flats have balconies, further compromising the youth club, see drawing elevation below. The building is finished with a mix of brickwork and painted render. Managing building maintenance will be an interesting exercise.

D4B East elevation TFS

D4C is similarly a four-storey building housing 34 flats, 5 one-bedroom, 19 two-bedroom and 10 three-bedroom. The main feature of the west-facing elevation, see below, is a simplified Jacobean Dutch-style gable.

“I ask myself, what were they thinking?”

D4C west elevation


The last but one of the buildings, this sits away from the existing perimeter of the site, as yet not visible from outside the site. Four storey’s high, housing one restaurant space and 16 flats over the four floors including two flats on the ground floor. Am I alone in thinking that the west elevation of the building is totally out of place, with pink painted render, elevation drawing below, probably more at home in Italy? The building boasts another square vented chimney feature.

D4A west elevation 03 09 20

Brightwell House, designated building number D12

A Grade II listed building which the former Waverley administration tried to demolish. Smallest building on the site although it is being extended with an appalling two-storey extension to the north side, see east elevation below. The building is currently ‘tented’. I am told it is being re-rendered and refurbished to the highest of standards. We will see. It will be dwarfed by the buildings that surround it. I recall reading somewhere that it was seen as a centrepiece. In my experience, you don’t surround your most treasured article with vast over-dominant other things.

D12 Brightwell House east elevation 03 09 20

The Farnham Society

We have a membership in excess of 650 – more than many other civic societies throughout the country. Our aim is to protect our town’s heritage while taking an active part in shaping its future. The scale of our membership is important for the impact it has on the different authorities and organisations we speak to, and it does make a difference. Thank you for being one of those members if you are. If not, why not join us. Explore our website.

If you would like to do more than just be a member, we are looking for support in one or two areas. If you think you may be able to help, please email 1memsec.fsoc@gmail.com or phone our Chairman, Alan Gavaghan on 01252 724714

David Howell

Chair of the Planning Committee


The future is no longer Orange. It is Orange right now for COVID in Waverley!


Things are not looking good for our borough right now. Waverley is now on AMBER ALERT  with reported cases of the COVID virus on the up!

Waverley’s total infection-rate since the start of the pandemic is now higher than Woking – with its large ethnic population and is not far off Guildford.

There have been a total of 670 confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Waverley since the start of the pandemic up to 2 October. However,  between September 26 and 2nd October cases increased by 64. Which has led to the borough being put on AMBER ALERT.

For the same period.

  • GUILDFORD – 82 new cases TOTAL of 777
  • WOKING  57 new cases 57. TOTAL of 552

Data is showing an increase in COVID-19 case numbers in other  areas of Surrey too and residents are being urged to be vigilant to slow any spread of the virus. 

As part of the Local Outbreak Control Plan for Surrey the county council made a commitment to be open and transparent about our response to COVID-19. Therefore, it is important to communicate any increase in cases, which is out of step what it would expect to see.

It has now confirmed that it is seeing significant rises in people testing positive for Coronavirus in Guildford and in Waverley. Similar warnings have been issued to Elmbridge, Woking,  Runnymede and Spelthorne, where cases are also rising.

Ruth Hutchinson, Surrey’s Director of Public Health said:

“I am grateful to everyone in Surrey who has listened to our advice and followed public health guidelines to help keep Surrey safe over the past months.

“We are continually monitoring the data across the county, and we now need to ask residents to help us stop the spread of the virus. 

“Rates of Coronavirus infections are rising fast across the country, and Surrey is no exception. Over the past few days we’ve seen significant rises in positive test in Guildford. We have issued similar warnings to Elmbridge, Woking, Waverley, Runnymede and Spelthorne, where infection rates are also rising fast.

“We’re at a crucial point and now is the time to do everything you can to limit the spread of the virus.   

“I can’t say it enough – keep washing your hands, wear face coverings when required, limit the number of households you are in contact with and don’t get together in groups of more than 6. Social distancing is one of the best ways to limit the spread of the virus.

“It has been a really tough year for all of us, and I know people are starting to feel ‘COVID fatigue’. But things are changing quickly and we need to get our infection rates back down.

“If we all follow the guidelines we still have the chance to get the situation in these areas under control and avoid any further restrictions.”

Weekly data for Surrey, broken down by Districts and Boroughs can be found at surreycc.gov.uk/covidcases

If you have Coronavirus symptoms – a persistent cough, high fever, or a change in smell or taste – then you should book a test by calling 119 or visiting www.nhs.co.uk/coronavirus.

Preventative measures are the best way to avoid local lockdowns.

Coronavirus advice and guidance: https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/people-and-community/emergency-planning-and-community-safety/coronavirus/latest-information-and-advice#advice

Surrey’s Local Outbreak Control Planhttps://www.surreycc.gov.uk/people-and-community/emergency-planning-and-community-safety/coronavirus/testing

COVID-19 cases* in the UK up to 2 October 2020.  Daily cases by date reported the UK, up to 2 October 2020467,146 total COVID-19 cases in UK up to 2 October 2020.

 43,912 new cases this week (26 September – 2 October 2020)

6,968 COVID-19 cases in the UK reported on 2 October 2020


Number of cases page6image373972944Cases (7-day average) 07/10/2020

*people with a lab-confirmed positive test result  cumulative number of cases

COVID-19 cases* in Surrey up to 2 October 2020