Farnham voters in Weybourne & Badshot Lea – now living in ‘Confused.com?’



A letter from Tom Horwood Chief Executive of ‘Your Waverley.”  

Which sounds to us here at the Waverley Web like a sketch the Two Ronnies would be proud of. 

Dear Voter in Weybourne & Badshot Lea

Postal Vote pack re-issue

This letter is being sent to you because you are registered to vote by post in the Waverley Borough Council ward of Farnham Weybourne & Badshot Lea for the 2nd May elections.

I apologise that many of the postal vote packs in this ward (on white paper) contain a printing error, which means that you will be receiving a replacement pack (on green paper). The printers have taken full responsibility for the error, but I would like to add how sorry I am that this has happened and that it is causing such an inconvenience.

The town council ballot papers (on peach-coloured paper) were fine. No other ward in Waverley has been affected and they will continue to use the correctly printed papers: white for borough and peach for town/parish. Only Weybourne & Badshot Lea will use the green papers for the borough.

If you have already sent in your white postal vote papers for Weybourne & Badshot Lea, they will not be counted and you need to vote again on the new green papers, which should arrive this week.

If you have not yet sent in your white postal vote papers, please destroy and dispose of them. Vote using the green papers, which should arrive this week.

If you have voted for the town council on the peach papers, that is fine: the town council peach papers were printed correctly.

Here at the Waverley Web, we respectfully suggest he should have added if you are Confused.com of Weybourne & Badshot Lea, and are seeing RED – you should address your letter of complaint to Aunty Elsie – Councillor Jenny Else a member of the EXECUTIVE – who claims that mistakes never happen at ‘Your Waverley’  on red notepaper!

All postal votes need to be received by us by 10pm on polling day: Thursday, 2nd May 2019.


Screen Shot 2019-04-22 at 18.48.25.png

Some or most of (but not all of) the 428 Waverley election postal ballot papers had the name and address of the voter on the reverse, and some had the wrong name & address. Of course, it’s the printers fault. But wasn’t someone checking the proofs?


This is how the head honcho says it happened.  This ward’s packs were initially delayed by a few days: in our usual proofing at the printers in East London, we rejected the Weybourne & Badshot Lea packs because a party logo was printed incorrectly. The printer fixed that problem but added the new error that wasn’t there before, with pages being printed in the wrong place, and then, unfortunately, did not send us proof copies before despatch. The printers have accepted responsibility for these errors. The wrong packs started arriving with voters on Saturday, 20th April. We were alerted over the bank holiday weekend and immediately worked to resolve the problem; I thank voters, candidates, agents and others who were in touch with me over the weekend. The National Electoral Commission has been kept informed and agrees with our plan to reissue the new postal vote packs on green paper.

Again, I am sorry.

Yours faithfully, Tom Horwood, Returning Officer

FWBL 22Apr19

Bramley’s new Tory babe jettisoned out of Cranleigh?


It’s going on all over the borough of Waverley – paper candidates who don’t give a damn whether they represent the voting fodder or not!

Screen Shot 2019-04-18 at 22.25.22.png


 Our Bramley, Busbridge & Hascombe followers may have noticed that the Tory Tossers have parachuted Cranleigh digger-driver Stewart Stennett into Maurice (By-Pass) Byham’s old seat. 

Eh? Yes, you may well wonder how a Cranleigh resident gets to stand in Bramley after the Cranleigh Con artists deselected him?  Of course, it shouldn’t be allowed, but these are strange times for Waverley TT’s who are shuffling the has-beens into wanna be’s wherever they can hang their hat in the hope they will dupe the voting fodder and get away with it.

Stennett who, together with his wife Jeannette, were former Cranleigh and Waverley Parish Councillors. SS infamously stepped down just a year into the parish job, whilst continuing to represent the biggest village in England at Waverley Borough Council. Cranleigh residents were outraged at this lack of accountability on behalf of their alleged local representative. and demanded – to no avail – that he step down from Waverley Borough Council too and allow a Cranleigh Parish Councillor to take his place but the self-serving Stennett was having none of it. He had green belt of his own to develop! And lots of secret meetings with his developer chums to hold!

The mutter in the Cranleigh gutter was that the Stennett duo, was in part, responsible for the emerging ‘Cranleigh New Town’ status. By assisting their developer cronies by voting in favour of schemes put forward by their ‘besties’, the Lettuce King and his cohort Andy Cranleafy. Now known as Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust and A2-Dominion.

But, enough of looking back in anger.

The residents of Bramley need to look to the future and ask themselves if the village of Bramley – with a population of 3,359 according to the 2011 census – is really so bereft of talent that it has to look outside the environs of its own village in order to get bums on local government seats?

Come on you Bramley Babes!

You were quick enough to get off your delectable derrieres to fight the Dunsfold Developer and to ensure that Bargain Booze didn’t dare to lower the tone of the village by raising its bargain basement profile in your rarified environs by christening the old Nisa Bargain Booze when they took it over. Surely one or two of you could have spared enough time from gelishing your toenails to stand up for your village and be counted. 

If you don’t stop navel gazing you’ll wake up the morning after the local May elections and find you’ve had the Cranleigh digger-driver foisted on you and there’s a reason he got that moniker – because he’s a big fan of concreting over the countryside even if its Green Belt – especially if it happens to belong to himself, his family or his cronies!

Wake up, Bramley, and smell the coffee … or do we mean the stench of local gerrymandering?

Your village needs you and you have just a few weeks to support your excellent Tory councillor Richard Seaborne who has served you well and vote in the Green Candidate Martin D’Arcy.  Otherwise, you’ll be shafted, and so will your countryside,  Don’t say we didn’t warn you …

Gone to Potty?



We just couldn’t resist sharing this letter written by one of our favourite Farnham people – Celia Sanders. It appeared this week in our new tabloid Farnham Herald.

We think everyone in the borough should see it.

Oh! What a tangled web we weave when once we practise to deceive?



Julia Potts soon to be back in the Waverley Chamber? 



Is Julia Potts running scared when it comes to the 2 May local elections?  Has she got the message that she may well be facing defeat in contesting against strong alternative candidates from other parties, who might offer a new improved model of governance in our local councils?  What is Ms Potts doing in deserting her seat and her local electorate in Upper Hale and in opting out of her council seats for Farnham and Waverley Councils in favour of chancing her arm as a non-resident and stranger in the Waverley Ward of Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford? 

Has she heard on the grapevine that Upper Hale does not run a Julia Potts appreciation society and that she would be likely to be booted out and replaced by a perhaps more popular or competent candidate?

She claims that she is making this move “with a heavy heart” so that she can concentrate on her role as Conservative Leader of Waverley. A curious claim given that Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford is a very large ward, almost the same size in area as Farnham all be it with just 10% of the population. Council ward duties would thus be significantly more challenging for Ms Potts than at present, around 6 miles away in her home ward of Upper Hale.

This all assumes, as Ms Potts appears to be taking for granted, that Waverley Conservatives will win a majority on the council, that Ms Potts will be elected in Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford and that she will be re-elected by the Conservative Group as their leader. There is no certainty that all of these things will happen, and it is perfectly possible that none of them will come to pass. It may be that the Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford electorate will object to “carpet-bagging” and the assumption that they will elect Ms Potts when they have the alternative of a well-respected local Parish Councillor. Is Ms Potts planning to move on, as she knows that the dismal record of the Waverley Conservative administration under her leadership is well understood in Farnham? However, it is just as likely to count against her prospects in Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford as well

And what do these shenanigans say about loyalty?  The Upper Hale electorate have placed their confidence in Ms Potts for the last eight years.  Why can she not repay that confidence by sticking with the people who have supported her?


Celia Sandars

I Old Church Lane, Farnham’


Where’s Welly?


Instead of the traditional Easter Egg Hunt, some Godalming residents have come up with something slightly different.  They want everyone to look under every bush and around every corner, to see if they can find Cllr Ross Welland – known locally as ‘Welly.”

Here’s a facebook trail – as they seek him here, they seek him there.

Anne Gray is a Conservative Town Councillor for Godalming Binscombe .. and the residents are using every opportunity to ask where THEIR councillor is?
The mysterious Ross Welland councillor for Farncombe & Catteshall. Godalming Tory councillor who seldom​ turns up – seeks re-election?

Screenshot 2019-04-18 at 12.09.36.png

Screen Shot 2019-04-19 at 09.09.09.png

Cllr Andrew Bolton rocks up for Charterhouse School planning application​ but stayed Shtumm on Godalming’s​ Ockford Park. Wonder why?


Because – just in case you hadn’t heard – there will soon be an ELECTION.


Screen Shot 2019-01-22 at 13.27.43

Please, Sir – we want more – and more and…even more just across the road on the school playing fields at Broom & Leas.

Screen Shot 2019-04-17 at 20.53.14.png

 Cast your minds back a couple of weeks when the highly controversial application to build shedloads of homes on the green belt at Ockford Park was considered and consented.  A total of 262 “grey homes” on the former green belt.

Here at the WW, we noticed Cllr Andrew Bolton kept his head down and didn’t avail himself of the opportunity to speak. Despite being one of the ward members. Here’s what one Godalming resident thinks of Waverley Planners and developers – ASSHILL. (Godalming Central & Ockford.) Godawfulming – here we come?

Absent Andy didn’t even put in a written statement. Wonder why? Well, the answer is quite simple. Because the former member for God Central & Ockford has shifted his hairy a*** over into the Godalming Charterhouse Ward – which is why he rocked up at the Joint Planning Committee on Wednesday. Because now he is the prospective Tory candidate for Charterhouse he hoped to speak up and gain a few brownie points to relay to residents on the doorsteps? That is he can get off his HA – and get out onto the doorsteps?

Is this the same councillor who accused his Lib Dem fellow Godalming Central Cllr Paul Follows of “politicising planning!” Oh, no it cannot be – can it?

However, suffice to say – Artful Andy’s ruse failed. – The application to build two four-storey blocks of student accommodation and 77 parking places on the school’s tennis courts which was recommended by officers for approval was  DEFERRED. So back to the armchair for the Artful Aarons’ Hill Dodger.

Delay is necessary as not all Natural England comments had been received and so the scheme may require an appropriate assessment. Because the site is, within 5km of the Wealden Heath Special Protection Area. Not that that normally worries Natural England or ‘Your Waverley’s planning officers!

Once approval has been given the scheme has to get the nod from the Secretary of State, whoever that is this week? But don’t worry chaps – we re sure one of the old alumni will put a word in for his Charterhouse chums! 

Also, hundreds of Cllr Bolton’s prospective voting fodder have listed objections as long as your arm – and more some, so this gets kicked into the long grass until after the May elections!

Screen Shot 2019-04-17 at 21.10.08.png

Screen Shot 2019-04-17 at 21.09.41.png
We could go on, and on, ad infinitum – but we know the residents of Charterhouse will get the drift.




What on earth is going on in Cranleigh? That is the question on the lips of confused residents.

Only weeks after Cranleigh Parish Councillors, to a woman, announced they were all eschewing party politics to stand as Independents, the faces of some Tory candidates were splashed across In Touch, the Cranleigh Conservatives newsletter which has been delivered to every house in the village! We wonder whose daft idea that was – certainly not Liz Townsend who is ever reticent about her achievements.

Do they think the Cranleigh voting fodder are stupid?

Or are they simply working on Abraham Lincoln’s old adage about deception:

‘You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time …’

and hoping that’s enough to get them past the post on election day?

Screen Shot 2019-04-16 at 17.20.12.png

From right to left. Mary Foryszewski, a wannabe Mayor in a new Tory administration – new boy Andrew Blurton and Angela Richardson. 

Does Ewhurst resident, and CRANLEIGH Parish Councillor Richardson think that dropping the Leprechaun outfit she dons for Parish meetings can wrap herself in a cloak of independence which she can shrug off when she dons her Rupert Bear outfit to stand shoulder to shoulder with her Tory colleagues for a photocall for In Touch?

In Touch? She’s having a laugh, isn’t she? OUT OF TOUCH is more like it!

Or, as one exasperated Cranleigh resident put it to us: ‘It’s not about the hustings in Cranleigh but the hustle!’  Ring any bells, Mrs Richardson, as it is widely known in Tory circles that you are considered a lynch-pin in the Guildford Conservative Asociation and one of its biggest fund-raisers and party activists. And, it is your fervent wish to climb the greasy pole to decorate Westminster when Anne Milton goes to the Lords.

However, one of your Tory running mates Cllr Liz Townsend has shown herself to be a woman with a truly  INDEPENDENT stance at Waverley where she has gained respectability and much admiration for her work on behalf of Cranleigh and the whole borough in recent years. She has earned her place at Waverley Towers – along with some other fine Conservative councillors who put people and place before politics.

It is Cllr Richardson donning her blue rosette wherever she goes, whilst pretending to be an independent at the parish, and conservative at borough level that tells you all you need to know about Cranleigh’s Con artists, who are responsible for putting the ‘con’ into Cranleigh Conservatives. You couldn’t make it up, really you couldn’t!

They shame themselves, their political party (from which they pretend to disassociate themselves when it suits them) and the local electorate whom they are supposed to represent, with their deceitful shenanigans.

Local elections are not a political game show, they are a serious matter and our advice to Cranleigh residents when it comes to election day and their pen hovers over the names of their new councillors to think carefully. Vote for the Cranleigh residents,  who are doing, and will continue to do a good job on your behalf. Not party activists – who are using Waverley as a stepping stone.


Can the Nasty Party stoop any lower? It’s LOCAL elections!!!


Screen Shot 2019-04-16 at 10.18.42.png

By putting out leaflets like this?

“Apparently just when you thought campaigning for the local elections could not get any lower. Then this appears – what on earth!.”

This is what the Labour candidate for Farnham Upper Hale and many residents received through his letterbox.



Green Candidate for Godalming Charterhouse said: “Negative campaigning or what? “Tories have a disgusting approach to politics – ruthless and arrogant.”



Shirley Wardell – Farncombe Green Candidate said: “I would like to understand how Conservatives have been able to stand up for our communities. The cuts and austerity have been really awful.”

We here at the Waverley Web wonder what the Farnham Residents candidates Peter & Penny Marriott think about this disgraceful negative campaigning?


WANTED. Head planning​ honcho for ‘Your Waverley?’


Screen Shot 2018-11-19 at 10.31.24

It is a sad day for the Waverley Web saying farewell to  Betty Boot aka Liz The Biz, aka Lilibet aka Elizabeth Simms Waverley’s chief planning officer.

Credit where credit is due – taking over from former planning head honcho Matthew Evans, a former Berkeley Homes employee turned gamekeeper was a poisoned chalice. However, the man who made his name holding ‘secret meetings’ with developers and Cranleigh councillors – can be proud of his pupil’s achievements. She has ensured Cranleigh is now on the cusp of becoming a New Town, Godalming and Farnham are almost grid-locked – Dunsfold Aerodrome will soon become home to many  – not planes – or petrol heads, other than those engaged in business, but families. In fact, our borough is now growing faster than knotweed.

Screen Shot 2019-03-26 at 10.10.25.png

She also managed to get the Local Plan adopted – well, almost – now it is doing another round in the courts to lower the housing numbers, thanks to Protect our Waverley and the Campaign for the Preservation of Rural England – promotors of all brownfield sites, except of course Dunsfold Aerodrome.



However, she has repeatedly reminded councillors on many thousands of occasions that she and her …

“officers are satisfied.” with anything and everything being built in and around Waverley.

That includes as many green fields as possible going under concrete, recommending, regardless of how damaging,  many hundreds of new homes are crammed into the back, side, and front gardens, other of course, than in Farnham. Even in Farnham, if it happens to be in the gardens of Tory councillors!!

We shall always remember her for her comments and protection of Waverley’s ancient Woodland. You know those old trees that have been around for 600 years or more. The ones she said could always be replaced with new ones!

And well done for agreeing to postpone the Local Plan Part 2. Until after the May,  elections to ensure Haslemere remains Blue and all those controversial developments remain in the IN file until May is OUT!

Would you buy a used car from these idiots let alone let them run our borough?


Godalming Conservatives failed to check the cropping on their candid photo in Godalming’s Crown Court yesterday. 

Eagle-eyed observers will be giving the thumbs up to the excellent photobombing by Green Party South East Press Officer Sam Peters. Pictured here on the right giving his expression of support. 

And when they Conservatives posted the photo into the local Community Group it quickly went viral with over 135 hilarious comments!

Screen Shot 2019-04-14 at 11.40.17.pngAnd it gets better here is a post we made earlier as Conservatives advertise Greggs Super Sausage Rolls. 

Screen Shot 2019-04-14 at 11.45.26.png

‘Your Waverley’ says auf Wiedersehen​ to another yet another absentee landlord of a Farnham seat.



Here’s yet another ‘CHINO’ who Mayor Denise Le Gal, fondly refers to as

  ‘Councillors Here in Name Only.’

stephenhillattendanceThey just keep on coming, don’t they? Councillors who for the past four years have only rocked up on a few occasions. But, have managed to bank their allowances, free car-parking badge and other council perks!

Let’s hope the new occupant of Farnham’s Moor Park seat left by the ‘very retiring’ Cllr Hill, who failed miserably to represent residents, makes a better job of things?

touchoffrostA Touch of Frost is on the run from her Wrecclesham & Rowledge seat – so she can continue to spew forth what her name suggests, – ‘A Touch of Frost,’ alongside her Tory running-mate Rashida Nasir. But, having thrown their hats into the ring, this undynamic duo might find they have a fight on their hands, after Cllr Hill’s dismal attendance record.

Farnham Residents’ candidates are Andy MacLeod, who after a great showing took the Surrey County Council Farnham Central seat received a nasty case of Frostbite from his opponent pictured.  He is joined by former Waverley employee and Union Rep Michaela Martin. Oh Lordy, lordy – let’s hope Frost and Martin don’t end up going head to head at Waverley Towers!?

Will the residents of the Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford Ward say – take me to my leader?


Giving up the seat for Farnham’s Upper Hale Ward was a wrench for ‘Your Waverley’s council leader Julia Potts. She leaves the ward she has represented at ‘Your Waverley’ for the past eight years with – “a heavy heart.”

Nothing to do with being fearful that she needed a much safer seat in True, blue Tory Tilford – no – of course not – and the Waverley Web’s true identity is Mary Poppins! And Protect Our Waverley wants to stop development in the borough, and not just at Dunsfold Park!

She also says in the Herald’s new tabloid edition that she is giving up her Farnham Town Council seat so that she can concentrate on with being Leader of Waverley Borough Council? The typical arrogance we have come to expect. A little more humility would not come amiss Potty One.

If you were so confident of your popularity then why not stay loyal to the residents of Upper Hale? 

Let’s hope you get the soft landing you are so confident of receiving from the residents of your new hunting ground?


Julia Potts getting ready to land in her newly acquired ward. Others too are being shuffled and set down like early Spring cuckoos in other ward’s nests. The bid to keep control of ‘Your Waverley’ is on.


Screen Shot 2019-04-12 at 08.39.56.png

Is it a bird? Is it a bee? No, it’s Potty parachuting into Tilford.

Gone to-day here tomorrow? Is ‘the retiring’ Liz Wheatley really making a bid for a seat in Farnham?


Here at the Waverley Web, we all thought we were beginning to show signs of memory loss – until we glanced back at the last FULL COUNCIL of ‘Your True Blue Waverley.’

Did we, or did we not, hear Mayor Farnham’s GAL – say…

Screen Shot 2019-04-09 at 11.35.48.png

‘So long,   farewell, Auf Wiedersehen,  GOOOODBYEEEE?


Screen Shot 2019-04-09 at 11.22.03.png

Yes, we most certainly did! – It appears that along with other Tories being shuffled around the borough like a pack of cards the second line of the song is more fitting?

Screen Shot 2019-04-09 at 11.35.08.png

Because Godalming’s former Binscombe Liz is not retiring after all but about to…

Screen Shot 2019-04-09 at 11.37.46.png

Over to Farnham Castle’s two-seat Ward to partner Sarah Anson to prevent the Tory stronghold from falling into the hands of Farnham Residents’ David Beaman and George Hesse. Paul Telford is also standing for the Liberal Democrats.

Or, having been thanked for her services to Godalming on her forthcoming retirement and service to the borough Farnham residents will tell her she will finally have an opportunity on May 2nd
To finally say…

Screen Shot 2019-04-09 at 11.37.07.png

Godalming Tory councillor who seldom​ turns up – seeks re-election?


Last week the Mayor of Waverley proudly named absent councillors as CHINO’s – “Councillors here in name only.”

So here’s one  councillor seeking re-election for Godalming, Farncombe & Catteshall,  who  doesn’t respond to the local’s appeals for help, and rocks up so seldom he has been nicknamed as…”The lesser spotted Welland.”

The call for change is on – right across the borough of Waverley. Here’s one candidate so ripe, he could be used in a crumble.

Screen Shot 2019-04-10 at 09.59.08.png


 Need we say more?




Will Godalming Tories’ wish be granted?


The Tory election machine has gone into overdrive in a bid to oust the single opposition voice that Godalming people have taken to their hearts and minds.

But as you will see from the picture below the Tories have more than Cllr Paul Follows to worry about. He has been joined by other local hopefuls wearing the Liberal Democrat yellow rosette, seeking seats in the town and borough councils.

One of the local issues they have highlighted is the proposed loss of the Godalming Surestart Children’s Centre axed recently by Surrey County Council.

As Nelson Mandela said:

“History will judge us by the difference we make to the everyday lives of children.”

Screen Shot 2019-04-08 at 21.24.17.png


The group above recently met with Dawn Bellman and her ‘Surestart’ team and was very impressed by their commitment and support to the community.

Sure Start Children’s Centres give help and advice on child and family health, parenting, money, training and employment.

They are a “one-stop shop” offering their own services as well as signposting to other professional or services, eg. Family Information Service, Food Banks, Job Centre Plus and The Citizens Advice Bureau.

Each Centre is required to offer core services to all families from pregnancy right through those important early years until the child is at school, directly reflecting the needs of the local community.

In January, Surrey County Council announced plans to close 31 children’s centres across the county, but at the 11th hour postponed closing recycling centres until after the elections! A cynical attempt to dupe residents into believing they were safe.

The 100 % Tory controlled Cabinet voted to close the centres along with reductions to some bus travel concessions citing the need to save money due to government cuts.

However, it managed to find over £50m to fund 28 new shops in the Brightwells Yard development in Farnham. A scheme shunned by private investors. 

In a public consultation, 86% of respondents disagreed that children’s centres were an appropriate way to make savings.

It is still unclear to staff, families and the public what will happen. The group pictured above are demanding answers. 

Here at the WW – we await any communication from the Godalming’s Tory hopefuls.

Has the Cranleigh Society taken over the role of the parish council?


Who exactly IS speaking up for the people of Cranleigh?

The Cranleigh Society was once a respected part of the local scene. Adopting the slogan –

“Speaking up for Cranleigh.”

Now it has become a village spin machine., often speaking with forked-tongue. This failing organisation which has lost officers and members could fold at is AGM if it cannot find new officers. A stream of chairmen have resigned, the latest who worked with the Protect our Waverley Campaign and the (CPRE) Campaign to Preserve Rural England to stop development on the only brownfield site in the borough, whilst watching the eastern villages losing acres of countryside to new homes, most of which have proved unaffordable for local people.

Recently the new town dubbed by Waverley councillors as…

“Poor old Cranleigh,” 

… featured last week’s Financial Times in- an in-depth study highlighting problems Cranleigh shares with others, over its huge number of bursting water pipes containing asbestos. However, though we hear from the locals that although the FT  journalist was pointed by the Cranleigh Society in the direction of  former member Adrian Clarke, prominent in the investigation of the asbestos scandal, CCS chose to make comments such as these.

So is the Cranleigh Society which first highlighted the asbestos issue – now speaking with a forked tongue for the people of Cranleigh? 

Screen Shot 2019-04-07 at 20.38.33.png

A scandal over blue asbestos in drinking water in the village dubbed ‘Poor Old Cranleigh’ has now hit the headlines of a National newspaper.


Screen Shot 2019-04-07 at 20.22.42.png


“Speaking up for Cranleigh Parish Council.”


Screen Shot 2019-04-07 at 20.22.59.png


Here at the Waverley Web, we receive regular missives from the Society. Many of which are so inaccurate and biased, in favour of certain developers, that we have stopped using them. Our Farnham Society, which is well-established and trusted, speaks up on issues affecting our town but obtains its members’ views first.

This latest is a typical example of its propaganda about a controversial plan to build a private care home instead of a hospital. An issue among donors for a hospital and day hospital which is causing great concern locally. Has a charity made it’s very own April Fool of the eastern villages?

Where has all the money gone?

here’s what the CCS had to say about new amended plans.

Screen Shot 2019-04-07 at 20.23.19

So according to the gospel according to the Cranleigh Civic Society or perhaps a  member of the Society, “an amended junction is safe.”

A crossroads, rather than a roundabout,  in Knowle Lane between the Berkeley Homes site and the new Private Care Home. Adjacent to entrances a few yards away for lorries delivering to Sainsbury’s’ and on the other to Wiskar Drive and M & S Foods. Which are yards away from the Kerbside Garage and the junction with the High Street?

So the WWeb wonders why the parish council is holding an Extraordinary meeting on 11th April when the Cranleigh Society has everything under control and all is tickety boo? WW wonder if the Society ever reads the Cranleigh Community Group Board?  A  group that is uncensored and reflects local views?

 Strange that the CCS, failed to mention that the plans also include another entrance. An entrance to the residential flats over the Snoxhall Sports fields single – access road which crosses the LITTLEMEAD BOOK AND THE DOWNSLINK?!?


Godalming’s starter for 6.


Councillor Paul Follows, Godalming’s’ new boy on the block, wants to reinstate planning committees at Godalming Town Council!

Reinstate? Did we hear that correctly? You cannot be serious!

Clucking Bell! Why doesn’t a town like Godalming operate a planning committee? An important part of the grass-roots democratic process?

Even the smallest parish councils hold regular meetings to consider their planning applications. Meetings that are held in public, where neighbours and applicants or their agents are given an opportunity to comment, provide information and answer any queries the committee and the public may have.

So why we wonder doesn’t a town council, whose membership includes a leading light in the of the Association of Parish & Town Councils, a former senior honcho at Waverley borough council, who has donned the Mayoral robes for a second time, think a planning function is unnecessary? A Councillor who rocks up at other parish councils advising them how to operate and conduct their business.

Tell us, someone, please? 

Here are Councillor Follows Quick 6 To Fix in Godalming. Most of which would apply to every other town and village in Waverley.

Screen Shot 2019-04-06 at 21.17.32.png

But,  Cllr Follows –  could you possibly add another to your list and make it 7? Just for your younger and older residents, who are falling all over the place in the badly re-instated roads and pavements in Godawfulming. A selection of pictures which are included below. We know it is a county council responsibility, but perhaps you could whisper, if you dare, into the ear of County Cllr Peter Martin, because we know he never listens to our complaints, but will listen to you!

The pictures below were all taken AFTER, the Surrey County Council roadworks were completed!! 

Screen Shot 2019-04-06 at 08.41.18.png


Screen Shot 2019-04-07 at 10.01.01.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-05 at 16.21.03.pngIMG_20190308_115516.jpg


Wannabe Developers and ‘Your Waverley’ are riding roughshod over the borough’s angry residents.


Screen Shot 2018-12-29 at 10.31.47.png

Air pollution in Waverley’s towns; bats lost in central Farnham; badgers drowned in Cranleigh; ancient woodland and wildlife lost in Rowledge; Hedgerows wilting and dying in Ewhurst.  

Wildlife and habitat, ancient trees and woodlands are disappearing at an alarming rate all over the borough of Waverley as the onward march of developers proceeds unabated.

Waverley officers have admitted they cannot keep pace with the rising number of complaints from the public on numerous breaches of planning conditions.  So far, they have taken no action against serious breaches including felling trees covered by Tree Preservation Orders, (TPO’s). They have also turned a blind eye to a major stream being dredged illegally in Cranleigh!   Along with ‘YW’ are those who also bear responsibility for caring for, and protecting our environment.  The Environment Agency, Thames Water, Natural England and the lead local flood Authority – Surrey County Council.

The townsfolk of Haslemere have been filming and photographing distressed deer at a proposed development site in Scotland Lane where wannabe developers have torn down ancient hedgerows and fenced in wildlife in anticipation of building 50 home in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.   A site, where ‘Your Waverley’ has recently banned and threatened legal action to remove residents’  noticeboardsHaslemere given a good smack by ‘Your Waverley’s’ iron fist.

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 14.23.07.pngScreen Shot 2019-03-25 at 14.24.04.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 14.21.35.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 14.26.20.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 14.25.02.png

The cold war is over – now the heat is on in ‘Your Waverley.’



As if we haven’t had enough fighting nationally – now we’re about to get it locally!


So Potty – put the kettle on?

The countdown to the May elections has begun.

For the first time for four years, voters have an opportunity to make a dent in one of the most arrogant and dominant Tory administrations this borough has ever had the misfortune to witness, (if the webcast is working.) 

It has seen off two plumply salaried and well- compensated failing Chief Executives – numerous heads of services – including two chief planning officers – and more planning, senior officers and staff, than you could shake a stick at!

One of whom is standing for election as a Farnham Residents’ candidate. We wonder how many secrets she will be revealing to the electorate of the inner-workings of Waverley Towers? Maybe, she believes she can achieve more from the outside than within?

Suffice to say – morale among staff, some senior officers and councillors, has never been worse. Outside consultants, Cratus Communications, was brought in to delve into the Waverley swamp to investigate relationships between councillors and officers. It found ‘YW’ to be seriously wanting. 

 In its strategic review, Cratus found there needed to be a  – ‘change of culture at YW.’   The WW is well-known for its cynicism, but change a culture endemic and buried deeper than the Great Train robbers’ stolen dosh?  Difficult!

“Your Waverley” doesn’t trust its staff and we don’t trust “some” of our councillors – Happy days are here again!

In an ideal world, the ballot paper should not include any party affiliations. Every elected councillor is there to work on behalf of, and do their best for, everyone in the borough of Waverley. This applies to the Farnham and Hindhead councillors who have treated the more rural areas in the east of the borough with contempt. Those who they denigrate not only deserve but are entitled to respect!  

Politics and control, should not be the prime influence at parish or borough level. The council has been in the grip of the Tory party for far too long, 49 Tories, one Lib Dem,  six  Farnham Residents’, one vacancy.  No checks or balance is no basis for good government. Neither is the level of contempt to which this small group of ‘opposition’ members is held by their Tory masters.

The Conservatives have, with rat-like cunning and determination, held on with a vice-like grip, to power. Almost every chairmanship and role within the Cabinet is jealously guarded by the Tories. Ever reluctant to allow the minority groups even a minimum of influence. Often side-lining their own backbenchers and keeping them in the dark. Power corrupts – absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The Mayor must be a Conservative, regardless of whether a more suitable or longer serving candidate exists outside the confines of THE ruling party. Why? Harold and Elsie Denningberg Labour Councillors representing Godalming for many years were loved and admired by everyone in Waverley. As were Doreen & Bill Bellerby in Guildford. In days long gone when politics was not polarised and when the health and welfare of the boroughs were all the better for it.

The May local elections could herald a sea change in how business is carried out in future in Waverley.

Of the 57 seats available a total of 53 will be contested. Areas, where seats are uncontested, are unhealthy in a democracy. Candidates should be shlepping through the April showers to determine and learn about, and act on public concerns.

As for carpetbagging around the borough for a seat when you have made yourself so unpopular on home-ground that you are de-selected by your local party faithful is reprehensible. We hope Bramley residents will recognise this, and ask their Cranleigh neighbours – WHY?

Is it a bird? Is it a bee? No, it’s Potty parachuting into Tilford.

So too is parachuting from an unsafe Farnham seat into a safe Tory seat elsewhere to keep a stranglehold on leadership?

 In Hindhead,  Haslemere and  Godalming, there needs to be a fundamental change in the expectation of the service voters are entitled to expect from their elected representatives. Cllrs Turning up for 20% of meetings, not turning up at all, or not having the good manners to resign, or explain long absences whilst collecting allowances, should be given the yellow card, put in the SIN BIN, be given the red card – and kicked off the pitch. Not hoicked around the borough in the hope that it will go unnoticed!

So will May 2019 herald a new beginning? 

Or will it be business as usual?

2019 Residents Alliance Plan A – By Area



First dibs at who is standing for borough seats at ‘Your Waverley,’ in the May elections.


Screen Shot 2019-01-19 at 10.50.06

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.54.00

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.54.13

Good news that ‘Sleepy’ Goodridge’ will no longer be able to boast that he doesn’t have to shlep around the doorsteps, and slides back into his council. seat.

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.55.16

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.55.32


The man who describes himself as ‘Cranleigh’s Digger Driver’ having been deselected by Cranleigh Conservatives turns his digger towards Bramley.

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.56.00

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.56.18

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.57.20

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.58.02

The Cranleigh couple Ken and Ruth Reed make a comeback to put up a fight against a Ewhurst woman who helps fill the coffers of the Guildford Conservative Association.’

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.58.27

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.58.53

Sixteen years in the job and  Patricia Ellis wants to make it twenty?

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.59.20

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 20.59.35

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.00.03

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.00.25

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.00.42

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.00.52

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.01.35

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.01.56

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.02.36

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.02.49

Godalming resident Sam Pritchard who only turns up for 20% of the time seeks re-election to serve the people of Farnham!!

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.03.29

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.03.45

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.04.11

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.04.25

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.04.52

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.05.04

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.05.22

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.05.36


Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.06.10

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.06.26

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.06.51

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.07.03

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.07.34

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.07.47

juliapottsparachuteAs the Waverley Web predicted. Fearful of losing her Farnham Hale seat to Farnham Residents’ former council leader Julia Potts hits the ground in the green, green grass of the safe Tory seat of Frensham, Dockenfield & Tilford.



Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.08.08

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.08.33

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.08.59

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.09.18

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 22.09.55



Would you buy a vegan sausage roll from these Tory hopefuls going all out to oust the popular Paul Follows after making a huge impact on Godalming in just one year?

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.09.54

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.10.05

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.10.38

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.10.48

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.11.10

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.11.27

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.12.16

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.12.31

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.13.01

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.13.22


Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.14.04

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.14.22

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.14.44

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.14.53

Is the man famed for the beauty of Blightwell’s back to have another stab at it after being turned down for a job at Westminster?

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.15.29

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 21.15.40Isn’t someone missing?

Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 23.24.42.png



Could it be that the Alfold Bobby – Kevin Deanus – can put his feet up and sail back onto the Good Ship Waverley unopposed to represent the people of Alfold, Cranleigh Rural & Ellens Green.?

Is it a bird? Is it a bee? No,​ it’s Potty parachuting into Tilford.


Things are getting a bit too hot to handle in Farnham’s Hale ward for ‘Your Waverley’s’ Leader.’ So she’s off to find a softer landing elsewhere in the borough.


And if you think she is alone – think again. Others are carpetbagging around the borough looking for greener grass too! 

Here at the Waverley Web, we liked how dainty she looks, landing on tippy toes into the green green grass of her new ward of Tilford. Her newly adopted home where she can be guaranteed a safe seat so she can slip seamlessly back into her leader’s role at ‘Your Waverley’ in the May polls for four more years? 

Has the Farnham Residents’ Group’s rising popularity put her in panic mode?


A scandal over blue asbestos in drinking water in the village dubbed ‘Poor Old Cranleigh’ has now hit the headlines of a National newspaper​.


Only look at this article taken from the Financial Times if you have a strong stomach, never drink water, or don’t live or work in Cranleigh.

Do read it Thames Water and Wannabe Waverley Councillors.


Click on the link below to read the article.


Within hours of a full-broadsheet page FT article hitting the streets, the castigation of a Cranleigh engineer had begun.  Don’t rush down to the Cranleigh newsagents, as over here in Farnham we heard that “a mystery gentleman’ bought up every copy of the prestigious FT – probably because he wanted to check his investments on the FTSE??!! Or maybe it was a developer?

However, fear not – we snaffled a copy over here, and offer our sincere sympathies to the residents of Cranleigh & the eastern villages who have suffered hundreds of burst pipes. Pipes that are leaking blue asbestos into their drinking water!

The WW first wrote about this phenomenon a year or so back. Not that anyone takes any notice of anything we say! However,  due to the dogged determination of  Cranleigh Society engineer Adrian Clarke the health implications were brought to the attention of MP Anne Milton and the statutory agencies.

The Society subsequently set up a Flood Forum which called to account Thames Water; The Environment Agency, Waverley & Surrey County Councils and the Health & Safety Executive. Who has simply done, little or nothing, except talk a lot we are told. Because pipes all over Cranleigh keep bursting, some have leaked for months if not years, putting fibres into drinking water!

Ignored by ‘Your Waverley’ but Thames Water is forced to recognise there IS a problem with blue asbestos in the East’s water supply!

 Cranleigh’s very own Erin Brokavich in trousers, namely  Adrian Clarke has taken his sorry story to the FT after watching workers wearing protective white masks as they removed burst pipes. Pipes made of asbestos cement. The former factory inspector has failed to persuade anyone- including the MP – to have pieces of pipework examined under laboratory conditions.  Nobody is suggesting that Cranleigh is the only place in the country with asbestos pipes, however, it is undergoing an explosion of housing development, just as we are in Farnham. But all progressing without proper attention to overburdened infrastructure – including water and sewerage treatment.

Screen Shot 2019-04-01 at 22.42.23.png

Adrian Clarke  pictured here believes: Screen Shot 2019-04-01 at 14.44.48.png

If it is dangerous to inhale asbestos- then it is dangerous to drink.”

Whilst the World Health Organisation (WHO) has no concerns, and neither do Thames Water, SCC or ‘Your Waverley’ councils. However, scientists are not so sure, pointing to the asbestos industry’s questionable research carried out on hamsters and rats.

“The WHO study was based on limited research and was incorrect,” Arthur Frank professor of Public Health and professor of medicine at Drexel University in Philadelphia told the FT. A man who knows his stuff and who has helped asbestos victims in court cases.

Screen Shot 2019-04-01 at 15.23.17.png

“There is plenty of evidence that water rushing through asbestos cement water pipes leaches out asbestos fibres and there is no question in my mind that ingestion of asbestos causes gastrointestinal tract and kidney cancers.”

Cranleigh’s campaigner agrees.

“People are still dying of asbestos-related diseases. Everyone assumes they inhaled asbestos at some point in their lives. But what if people are dying from drinking asbestos fibres in water?”

Note: Thames Water told Cranleigh residents it would be renewing a considerable amount of the 1950’s and 60’s pipework. It hasn’t. Despite the fact that increased water pressure to thousands of new homes is progressing, and blowing mains and pipework to older homes. For Sale signs litter Cranleigh’s Streets and new homes are languishing on the market despite huge incentives including price cuts. 


Has a charity made it’s​ very own April Fool of the​ eastern villages?


Andy Webb’s  hugely  popular Cranleigh Community Group which is gathering  new members every week has been challenging a local “charity.” (We use the word advisedly as it comes with a health warning!)

Mr Webb, nothing to do with the Waverley Web we might add, wanted an open to all comers public meeting, to delve into the shenanigans of an outfit hell-bent on using former villagers’ land and money on which to build an 80-bed private CARE home.

Not a hospital – not a day hospital – not outpatients clinics, but 20 community beds for Surrey – yes Surrey residents so the county council can flog off a former 65-bed dementia home site and build – yes you guessed – 20 or so houses on its land in Ewhurst Road. It’s called laughing all the way to the bank. If they can find one open?

So as you will see from the post below Mr Andy Webb asked the Cranleigh Village “Hospital” Trust to rock up and tell it like it is  – warts and all. So, if the public doesn’t receive a satisfactory explanation, they can ask, for their money or their land back.

So was Retired GP Dr Fawkner-Corbett embarking on an April Fool when he replied that it couldn’t answer residents burning questions because of Purdah!!!

For the uninitiated, that is the period of six weeks, during which – councils, not councillors,  have to shut up and put up.

Screen Shot 2019-03-31 at 21.17.31.png


So whose leg are you pulling Doctor? Or was this part of your cunning plan, to stop the public meeting, and put them off the scent by telling them – “this public consultation event will take place in the Summer,” when you know only too well that you intend to get your planning application passed in April,  so that you can present the donors of your – ill-fated scheme with a fait accompli?

Then, of course, you can tell everyone to roll up-roll up for the Cranleigh Village Hospital Show with planning permission tucked up your ar** where it is safe. 

Ever heard the old adage? You can fool some of the people, all of the time, all of the people some of the time. But not all the people all of the time?

Screen Shot 2019-03-18 at 09.07.37

Where has all the money gone Part 2?

Residents want action from highways to​ stop HGVs using Surrey Hills rural roads as rat-runs.


But, Inspector Gary Smith, borough commander for Waverley, said: “With regards to a magic wand about what we can do, I’m afraid I haven’t got a clue.”

No doubt he will do something when he knows our Wannabe Prime Minister Jeremy Hunt lives in Markwick Lane? Perhaps there will be a flyover over Mares Pond? 


Screen Shot 2019-03-31 at 09.48.50.png

Councillors are calling for action to stop HGVs using rural roads as rat-runs through the Surrey Hills. 

They claim Surrey County Council is not taking problems seriously enough and needs to act on the issue of heavy lorries. thundering through rural lanes.

Prompted by members of the public, councillors want Matt Furniss, SCC’s cabinet member for highways, to meet them to discuss what can be done about lorries using rural lanes including Markwick Lane, Hascombe and the Shere Road over Winterfold as shortcuts. Lorries are regularly stuck in the Shere Cut.

Resident Paul Osborne presented a 250-signature petition calling for a 7.5-tonne weight restriction on  HGVs on Waverley’s rural roads which revealed how bad the situation had become between Milford’s Station Lane to Markwick Lane, Loxhill. (SW Surrey MP Jeremy Hunt lives at Mares Pond.) Mr Osborne wants planners and highways to enforce construction traffic management.

He said residents were concerned about the “exponential growth of traffic” between the A3 at Milford and the A281 in Cranleigh. “Surrey CC Highways has ignored the cumulative impact of extra traffic generated on this route by construction traffic from 3,000 new homes now being built in Cranleigh and the eastern villages, and those proposed at Dunsfold Park, and Milford Golf Course.

“If Cranleigh tip closes it will create an extra 15% traffic using this direct route to Witley tip. This east-west route will suffer a severe environmental and safety impact. This needs to be addressed urgently.”

Mr Osborne had been monitoring road usage revealing  that more than 3,000 vehicles a day, with 45% being commercial users were using the road and drivers repeatedly ignored the ‘Unsuitable for HGV” signs.’

 Cllr Richard Seaborne (Bramley) said: “I drive down that road and find it a most uncomfortable experience. HGVs certainly cause the worst of the problems. The Surrey Hills is full of examples of this.

SCC member Cllr Andrew Povey said: “I think we are not taking the issue seriously enough in the county council. It’s a problem on a wider scale.”

 Cllr Denis Leigh had stopped using Markwick Lane said:  “I am not prepared to put my car through the damage.” He claimed there were “serious tensions” in communities and a “disconnect” between what residents experience and what highways authorities reported.

Highways officers and police officers said it was hard to enforce a weight restriction. Frank Apicella, SCC area highway manager, said: “We have many roads like this in the Surrey Hills with the same problem, narrow lanes not suitable for this type of vehicle.” Saying there were already signs warning drivers it was unsuitable for passing.

Inspector Gary Smith, borough commander for Waverley, said traffic officers would need to look at the whole problem and not just one road in isolation, but warned their resources were stretched.   “Our biggest issue is reducing road death. That’s not to belittle this. I use the road regularly so I know what a problem it can be. While we want to do our bit, it would not be top of the list for priorities for Surrey police traffic enforcement.”

“With regards to a magic wand about what we can do, I’m afraid I haven’t got a clue.”

Mr Osborne said enforcement was not the reason for the weight restriction, but signs would act as a deterrent and a warning to drivers to stay away from using the rural roads as a rat-run through the Surrey Hills.

Committee chairman Cllr Victoria Young said the problem was a concern for the whole of the borough and should be looked at in a “more holistic manner.” She said she will contact Cllr Furniss and ask him to attend a meeting.

A video compiled by Mr Osborne showing the scale of the problem in one part of the Surrey Hills was shown to councillors before the meeting. It can be seen here http://www.gu8superfast.co.uk/

And – another Tory bites the dust!


More Tory councillors “Missing in Action, “In just the past 6 months!

That’ is now THREE, yes THREE, conservative councillors for Haslemere/Hindhead who have either resigned or have been disqualified for non-attendance.

Last October, a Hindhead town councillor was disqualified, after attending precisely ZERO meetings in his short-term in office. Now we’ve heard of paper candidates, but this one was obviously of the toilet variety.

Now, a Hindhead borough councillor has been disqualified for non-attendance. If you are a Tory you can put two fingers up to the organisation – and they will make excuses for you?
Also, a Haslemere Surrey County Councillor has resigned, having attended just 14% of his required meetings, in the past 6 months.Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 11.08.46.png

Also – at an important public meeting in Milford, last week with the Police and Crime Commissioner, THE ONE, but soon we predict, not the ONLY Liberal Democrat councillor attended, together with just one other Waverley borough councillor. A Tory councillor who is not standing for re-election.

So, not a single Tory councillor up for re-election could be bothered to attend an important public meeting on local policing?  In a town which, like others in the borough, is suffering from increasing crime and anti-social behaviour.

Waverley and Surrey’s Conservative councillors have become arrogant and complacent. isn’t it time that we here in the borough of Waverley, voting fodder that we are, demanded more from our councillors? Including ‘GoodRiddance’ in Wonersh who regularly boasts that he slides into Waverley unopposed every year, and then regularly falls asleep.  Sweet Dreams are made of this?

Isn’t it time for a change on May 2nd?

The Haslemere Herald reflects the anger. and so did we in the link above. 


The Sorry Advertiser prematurely axes Wings & Wheels?


What a difference a day makes – or, in this case, a week or two.

On 5 March The Sorry Advertiser announced – via Get Surrey – that:

Farnborough Airshow’s public weekend has been PERMANENTLY CANCELLED due to declining popularity and attendance.

But, roll on a couple of weeks, to 25 March, and The Sorry Advertiser is proclaiming – again via Get Surrey now referred to as Surrey’s dogging website – that:

Wings & Wheels airshow AXED! When in fact it will take place for the last time over the Fathers’ Day weekend June 15/16.

One begins to wonder just how much further the Sorry Ad can sink in its Dunsfold-Bashing vendetta? Couldn’t be anything to do with one of its directors living on the airfield perimeter fence – could it?

How on earth can it hope to be considered impartial in its reporting when it provides sympathetic and reasoned coverage of the demise of Farnborough’s public weekend ‘due to the declining popularity of airshows and poor attendance in recent years’ and yet totally ignores the fact that Wings & Wheels which has suffered the same fate as Farnborough – and many other UK airshows after the Shoreham tragedy – but without the week-long global aerospace, defence and space trade event, which underpins and bolsters Farnborough’s finances?

Is this just poor journalism or sour grapes?

But never mind, some people couldn’t be happier about the imminent demise of Wings & Wheels: according to the mutter in the Cranleigh gutter. An outfit supported by a Cranleigh developer is hosting a folk festival in Knowle Lane in aid of St Nicholas Church.  on the new Cranleigh Showground aka country park. This is, licence permitting, intended to replace Wings & Wheels in the hearts and minds of the village … in addition to bringing the entire village to a standstill if the 20,000 visitors they’re anticipating do indeed descend on Cranleigh!

PS No doubt Dunsfold Park’s arch enemy, Little Britton, will be rushing out the invites for his annual knees-up at the Aerodrome’s expense. Our Dunsfold Village correspondent tells us Little Britton and his Missus like to erect a marquee in their garden, overlooking the Aerodrome, and invite their nearest and dearest to witness the jamboree for free!

Perhaps, he and the numerous other freebie spectators would like to drop the odd coin into Dunsfold’s coffers, for the numerous charities it has supported over the past 20+ years. Charities which have included the now, disgraced Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust? Who,  rather than building a hospital and day hospital it pledged after duping thousands of fund-raising residents,  now intends to build a private care home and community beds for the people of Guildford, Waverley and Surrey!

Couldn’t be supported by the same people behind the new Cranleigh relief road between Knowle Lane and Alfold Rd – could it?  Surely not using the church as yet another vehicle to get another cunning development plan while by-passing the planners by sleight of hand, could it? Surely not?


Farnham’s Redgrave Rests in Pieces.


Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 21.23.18.png

Thanks to the swinging demolition balls of developers Crest Nicholson and ‘Your Waverley,’ Farnham’s much loved Redgrave Theatre has been reduced to a pile of rubble.’

It will now make way for Blightwells Yard which, all of us here in Farnham, will now be well aware includes this huge chunk of shops and restaurants! In which Surrey County Council has invested £57m of our money in 28 retail units!

 Waverley’s FB page contains an image of the Blightwells development, featuring some generic and vague shops.
We thought we would tweak it slightly for them…


Business will never forgive the Conservative Government for its failure to deliver BREXIT.  And, the people of Farnham will never forgive Waverley Borough Council for sacrificing a once highly valued venue for culture and entertainment, which we all now so badly need,  for a shedload of homes and shops. 

Along with the Redgrave family and the people of Farnham, WE here at the Waverley say to Farnham’s Redgrave.

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 21.23.18


Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 21.23.18.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 21.21.51.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 21.22.56.png Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 21.22.15.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-21 at 21.54.42.png

PS. The head honcho of Crest Nicholson – Patrick Bergin has just been ousted. wonder why?




With only 38 days to go, Awfold Parish Council stands accused of trying to effect a coup d’état in relation to upcoming local elections.

According to the mutter in the Awfold gutter, the unelected Clerk to the Parish Council Crystal Tipps Weddell (CT’s), for her involvement in the Awfold PC / POW money-siphoning scandal of last year) stands accused of failing to upload to the  Parish Council website details of the forthcoming elections to be held on Thursday 2 May 2019 to elect councillors for all borough and town/ parish seats.

As the paid parish Clerk, CT is responsible for keeping Awfold parishioners abreast of the shenanigans – oops! silly us, of course, we mean, the business – of the Parish and its Council … but, then again, shenanigans just about sums up the goings on at Awfold Parish Council under her reign!

According to our Awfold mole CT – who pretty much runs the Parish Council, despite her official title being Clerk, not Chairman! – is, once again, on manoeuvrers with the aim of pulling off a Parish putsch.

Regular readers will be aware that the Waverley Web warned, some months ago, of a plot to parachute Little Britton into the role of Chairman of Alfold Parish Council at the May 2019 elections when Nic Pigeon stepped down from the role.

Q: Since when did an utter novice get the top job?

Q: Since when did someone with absolutely no experience as an Awfold parish councillor get shoe-horned into the role of its Chairman?

Q. Since when did a chairman get elected before an election had even taken place?

In the normal course of events, as is the case with all others, read the parish mag to hear about Loxwood’s efforts, the council should be inviting and encouraging expressions of interest in the vacancies for the pending parish council election when Cllrs Betty Ames and Nic Pigeon step down. But under CT’s increasingly proprietary rule, that isn’t happening and a few locals are beginning to cry Foul!

So here at the WW – we thought we would give CT’its a bit of a hand.

Nomination papers must be submitted by hand at the Waverley Borough Council offices and an appointment will need to be booked in advance to meet with the Returning Officer or one of his Deputies. This means that a candidate may come into the offices to submit their papers themselves, or ask someone they trust to do it for them. Election Agents can submit nomination papers on behalf of their candidates.

Nominations can be submitted between 9:30am and 4pm on weekdays from 22 March until 3 April, by appointment only. The Returning Officer, Tom Horwood would like to remind all candidates that the close of nominations deadline of 4pm on the 3 April is set in law and is absolutely final.

The Electoral Services Team will be as accommodating as possible, but those that leave it to the last minute run the risk of not being able to get an appointment, or not having enough time to re-submit an application that has not been filled in correctly.

Candidates should call Electoral Services on 01483 523116 or email: electoral.services@waverley.gov.uk to reserve your appointment as early as possible.

Bearing all of the above in mind, Crystal Tipps Weddell has left it a bit late to give interested parties an opportunity to get their ducks in a row!

Presumably, Chris ‘Little Britton’ of Protect Our Waverley can’t believe his luck. No forewarning of the vacancies has yet been broadcast on either Awfold Parish Council’s website or social media outlets and longstanding locals are stunned that no one is being encouraged to put their name forward and begin electioneering. Can it possibly be that, once again, poor old Awfold is being done-over by the unelected Clerk and her acolytes? “This is Widow Twanky and the Tory-Tossers at their despotic worst!” stated one email we’ve received from a concerned local resident. “We had hoped, after the money  scandal, Mrs Weddell and Mr Pigeon had learned their lesson but, apparently, not.”

We’ve been asked to remind the current chairman, Cllr Pidgeon, and the unelected Clerk, Mrs Weddell, that they have a responsibility to Awfold’s parishioners to play it by the book … not the book according to Pidgeon & Weddell but the book according to Fair Play! This is not the Crystal Tipps & Pigeon show – shortly to become the Crystal Tipps & Little Britton Show if they get their way! – it’s about Awfold parishioners and their desire to take the ‘w’ out of Awfold and restore the ‘l’ word (light touch) as opposed to the heavy-handed rule of Weddell & Co. For, make no mistake, it is Weddell’s hand is on the tiller of the not-so-good ship Awfold … or do we mean the hand that rocks the cradle?

Alfold residents deserve to be treated with courtesy and respect. They deserve an opportunity to throw off Weddell’s whip and we encourage them to do so by throwing their hats into the ring, stepping up to the plate and taking an interest in the affairs of their village because, if they don’t, they will get the local councillors they deserve! And we really don’t want to repeat that old chestnut about blue ribbons and monkeys …

Waverley Mayor has the GALL to joke about councillor non attendance


The GALL of it!! How dare she make a joke of this? Brush it off as if its a Conservative in-joke between Mayor Denise Le Gal and Peter Martin. Chatting as if its a common problem for the Waverley Conservatives, but it doesn’t matter, given their massive majority, does it? Watch this clip from the Waverley Full Council meeting last week:

If you are a Tory you can put two fingers up to the organisation – and they will make excuses for you?

Watch this space for Part 2 of the Tory Chinos who have also gone!

Grave news for Waverley residents.


Screen Shot 2018-08-10 at 14.58.01.png

As Benjamin Franklin said in 1789

“In this world, nothing can be said to be certain except death and taxes.” 

Most have accepted that both ‘Your Waverley’ and Surrey Councils, have increased council tax by the maximum 3.9%, but it is the hidden increases, like those outlined in the table below, that go unnoticed. 

Because when ‘Your Waverley’ presented its budget it only chortled on about not putting up car parking charges and continuing its support (not increasing. So a year-on-year reduction)  to the voluntary sector! It failed to mention that hundreds of increases in council charge for everything from recreation to planning, legal searches to dying. All voted through, without comment.

Neither did anyone mention that Surrey County Council has increased its share of council tax 20 times during the past 21 years – and last year was thwarted when it proposed increasing council tax by 15%!

Screen Shot 2019-01-21 at 11.04.17.png

We feel an election​ coming on?​



Here are just a few comments from members of the public in and around The borough of Waverley as the flag is about to signal the start of election frenzy. 



Just a recap to remind everyone in Farnham how the Tories fared in the borough council elections four years ago.

Screen Shot 2017-10-07 at 17.48.45.png

Villagers bemoan the loss of their green fields and countryside, and new properties being squeezed onto flood-prone sites. They put the blame squarely, but perhaps not fairly on its councillors – all of whom are Tories?

Screen Shot 2018-08-07 at 09.38.53.png

Haslemere given a good smack by ‘Your Waverley’s’ iron fist.


You couldn’t Adam and Eve it. The law-abiding good people of Haslemere having decided not to sit idly by and watch their countryside suffer from the onward march of developers. Erect the sign featured below. Then along comes the jobsworths from Waverley and demand its removal – or else!

Because it was – ‘Political Advertising!”

Residents were told they could face a  fine by the Magistrates Court of £2,500 and a daily fine of £250! What is this, the Soviet bloc?

What? Fine and deprive the innocent people of Haslemere of free speech? God help us here at the Waverley Web then, if and when they find us. Jankers for life? Or even worse, tread on our web?

Oh! no… if you want to rule and thrive let a spider run alive?cropped-t2ec16vhjfwffz8rnuyzbsktypsiuq60_59

WHY did this stupid council act in such a draconian way?

SIMPLES… Because residents dared to demonstrate how much they care for their beautiful countryside during an election period. Perish the thought that the voting fodder of Haslemere gives a damn about politics. After all, didn’t they just vote onto the town council a Hindhead Tory despite knowing he insulted the residents of Cranleigh & Ewhurst in his bid to cover their countryside in concrete? The other councillor for Hindhead has gone AWOL!

More prats deserting Waverley’s sinking Tory ship?Will the people of Haslemere vote for more of the same at a Town Council by-election to-day?

If you are a Tory you can put two fingers up to the organisation – and they will make excuses for you?

So why such indecent haste, to use an iron fist to get ‘the offensive’ sign removed? How stupid of ‘Yor Waverley’ to offend every, man, woman and child in True Blue Tory land – just weeks before the election.  Everyone is aware that the Local Plan Part 2 includes several Haslemere sites for development. Including 50 homes in an Area of Great Landscape Value in Scotland Lane. And that it was delayed, by the Tory tossers until after the May election to ensure Haslemere remained True Blue!! Devious or what?

So what excuse did Waverley’s enforcement Wallies give for their draconian action?

“Because Waverley has an obligation to protect the sensitive Waverley environment from indiscriminate and harmful signage.”

Is that the same Waverley we hear you cry, that allowed ancient woodland to be damaged in Farnham in Cranleigh, Dunsfold, and elsewhere across the borough. Who allowed the bats at East Street to be destroyed,  badgers to be drowned in Cranleigh, and has threatened the future of Special Protection Areas, including endangered birdlife by ignoring Environmental Law!!

What a monumental bunch of hypocrites!

Here’s the sign.

Screen Shot 2019-03-13 at 20.10.30.png

Residents lining up to take down the offending “political sign” – rather than risk a £2,500 fine and £250 per day! 

Screen Shot 2019-03-13 at 20.09.41.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-13 at 20.09.10.png


Screen Shot 2019-03-13 at 20.08.23.png

You can upset some of the people, some of the time and get away with it. But, not all of the people all of the time.



Desperate times for the Tories must have arrived in Farnham?


 ‘Your Waverley’  wants to promote…

“A new approach to help us to build community cohesion and create a strong local identity. Engaging with our local communities will be at the forefront of how we will take projects forward, making sure we listen to the voices of the active and articulate, as well as the vulnerable or rarely heard.”


Q: When is a Neighbourhood Plan not a Masterplan?

A: When Farnham Conservatives desperately need Election PR.

Can you believe that Waverley Tories have decided that they need to have a new Masterplan for Farnham! So they have voted themselves another £100,000 for Consultants to come up with a vision for the next 25 years.

Hold on, didn’t the Farnham Town Council just spend £25,000+ on a plan? A plan that went to a referendum – and won a High Court Appeal – for the next 18 years? What Tory twerp thought we really need to cover all this again and in particular the years 2032 – 2039?

When most of us would like some assurances about what will happen next week!!

What else could they come up with to spend a mysterious £250,000 reserve from the Business rate pilot? Farnham Herald reports, rather tartly: “The windfall will, says the council, be used to fund “exciting community-led projects” starting with a Farnham masterplan – “looking at the town in a more joined-up way”, ensuring sites such as Brightwells and the Woolmead “work together sympathetically, with each other and the wider town”. No really! You have to be joking, it is an early April fool surely?

ummingbirdThinking up something nice and fluffy to say ahead of the local elections, Julia Potts Waverley’s very own umming bird came up with this at the Full Council meeting: “This new approach will help us to build community cohesion and create a strong local identity. Engaging with our local communities will be at the forefront of how we will take projects forward, making sure we listen to the voices of the active and articulate, as well as the vulnerable or rarely heard.”

But hasn’t the bird flown from Farnham? Is it a bird? Is it a bee? No,​ it’s Potty parachuting into Tilford.

Since when has Waverley managed to build community cohesion in Farnham?!

Well, Waverley’s Chief Executive Tom Horwood has the answer! He gave £98K to his mates at RegenCo “transforming Britain one town at a Time” (The outfit that  worked with him at East Hants to oil the wheel of Whitehill/Borden Masterplan) and call it a Place Shaping Exercise

If you are a Tory you can put two fingers up to the organisation – and they will make excuses for you?




Councillor Christiaan Hesse the Conservative Councillor for Hindhead who hasn’t turned up for a single meeting for the past six months, was warned after four months and did not respond.  Perhaps the voting fodder of Hindhead might think more carefully before they elect their next representative?


Although we reported that The Conservative Councillor for Hindhead Christiaan Hesse was dumped by your Waverley ten days ago, at last night’s Full Council Meeting it was announced officially by Leader Julia Potts. Saying – “he hasn’t turned up here for six months.”

Whisper who dares – and he does – frequently,  in bounded, Lib Dem Godalming Councillor Paul Follows – who simply mentioned that since joining ‘Your Waverley’ he has enjoyed the “vigorous debating” and “ideas” put forward at various council meetings, at which he only wished  more Conservative councillors would – “turn up and attend.” Adding that their non-attendance was an insult to the residents who elected them. WOW!

An utterly arrogant  Mayor Denise Le Gal lightheartedly interjected by saying with a smile – they were normally referred to as…


At which point up shot Carole Cockburn saying she hoped the day would never come when councillors would have to spell out their reasons for non-attendance. Which could be through illness or personal. 

But not to even have the good grace to write, or respond to the Council and resign Cllr Cockburn?  

What excuse do you have for your Tory colleague for that? 

Here at the WW, we have witnessed Councillor Hesse become more and more frustrated and disenchanted with your Tory administration, its decision-making, its unwillingness to listen to many insiders, let alone outsiders, your Tory-dominated inner-fold. Thereby hangs another tale of Tory dissent?

More prats deserting Waverley’s sinking Tory ship?

Perhaps he should update his Linked In:

Plus his biog says he is: Excellent written and oral communication and influence skills. High-level UK security cleared.Screenshot 2019-03-19 at 10.51.33.png


Now, who’s​ felt a touch of the whip?



Guildford’s MP Explains Her Reasons for Defying Party Whip

Guildford, Cranleigh and Eastern Waverley villages  MP, Anne Milton, has been criticised by Brexit supporters for abstaining in the recent vote to remove the “no deal” option.

When the Commons voted on an amendment to reject the UK leaving the EU without a deal under any circumstances, by a margin of four Our Annie sat on her hands and crossed her fishnets!

Resulting in the government’s original motion – stating that the UK shouldn’t leave the EU without a deal on 29 March – was changed at the last minute.

The government had wanted to keep control of the Brexit process by keeping no-deal on the table, so ordered Conservative MPs to vote against their own motion.

The tactic failed because  Government ministers, including former whip Anne Milton, defied those orders leading to claims Mrs May had lost control of her party.

“The updated motion, to reject a no-deal Brexit under any circumstances, was passed by 321 to 278, a majority of 43.”

Anne Milton who has consistently said that, in her view, a “no deal” departure from the EU would be very damaging to the UK, was one of 13 government ministers – including cabinet members Amber Rudd, Greg Clark, David Gauke and David Mundell, to defy the government whip by abstaining.

 In a message to constituents, she said, “There was a series of amendments tabled by MPs  I voted against the amendment (a) in Dame Caroline Spelman’s name to remove no deal as an option partly because of the comments she (Dame Caroline) made herself. “She attempted to withdraw her amendment believing that the main Government motion was more powerful. However, the amendment was still put to the House and was won very narrowly – there were 312 votes in favour and 308 votes against.

“The main motion then became the only opportunity to prevent no deal on 29
March. Leaving with a deal has consistently been the Government’s preferred
outcome and this is a personal view that I have long held myself.

“I have always believed that a deal with the European Union, and a measured transition when leaving, was important for our economy. I, therefore, did not feel I could vote against this motion but wanted to make sure no deal was removed as an option.

“I would like us to leave the EU on 29 March and, had the Prime Minister’s deal
been supported, this would have been possible. I believe that a delay is now
inevitable if we do not want to leave without a deal in place.”

 Guildford resident Stuart Barnes, a former Conservative party member who supports Brexit, said,  “Judging by the disgraceful betrayal by MPs and ministers it seems that our Conservative MP was not listening when the resolution was passed by the GCA [Guildford Conservative Association].

“This possibly means the end of the party or at least a split between the real Conservatives (there are still some in the party) and the faux Conservatives who were mainly brought in under the ghastly Cameron regime.

I look forward to news of mass sackings and deselections of the faux Conservative MPs as their constituency members in the main are still real Conservatives.”

Godalming resident Patrick Haveron commented: “I see Anne Milton abstained, supporting the government on ‘No Deal’. Quite a feat for a former whip!”

Leave campaigner Christian Holliday, a Conservative borough councillor for Burpham was more conciliatory. Saying,  “I’m pleased Anne didn’t support the motion as amended. Attempting to rule out ‘No Deal ever’ on any circumstances sends out completely the wrong message in negotiations with the EU, although it is worth re-emphasising that ‘No Deal’ is still the current legal default position and, in my view, is the outcome that most closely reflects the referendum result.”

Guildford Conservative Association chairman Bob Hughes added: “Anne has shown once again that she puts the people she represents first. She continues to support the Prime Minister’s deal but regards leaving with no deal as being potentially disastrous, at least in the short term. It is not what people voted for and she is right to seek to rule it out.”

The three other Tory MPS whose constituencies overlap Guildford Borough, Michael Gove (Surrey Heath) Sir Paul Beresford (Mole Valley) Jonathan Lord (Woking), and Jeremy Hunt (Waverley) all supported the government and voted against the motion

Explaining the rebellion the “conservativehome” website states: “..it may well be that there are extenuating circumstances. First, it wasn’t expected that the Government’s motion would be amended. Before it was passed, the whip for the Government’s motion was for a free vote.

“Next, it is being claimed that a senior MP, or Downing Street aide, or both, indicated to some of the Ministers concerned that they would be able to abstain on the motion still – despite the amendment, originally tabled by Caroline Spelman, having been passed.

“The long and short of it is that it isn’t clear as we write which of the above, bar Mundell, acted knowingly in defiance of a three-line whip. And the waters will doubtless be muddied sufficiently so that we never know.”

Follows on Crime as Godalming is dubbed – ‘A frontier town!’


Crime is now a regular feature on all Waverley’s neighbourhood community boards. There were 19 incidents in one night in Cranleigh!  Many others reported to the police in Haslemere and Farnham. Godalming resident Mark Kimber is now referring to Godalming as a ” frontier town.”  

Others tell us they can’t even be bothered to report incidents and are taking their own measures to keep their homes, families and vehicles safe.

Here’s what Mark Kimber thinks…

Screen Shot 2019-03-16 at 21.21.47.png

And here’s what Liberal Democrat Godalming Councillor Paul Follows has to say about the deteriorating situation.

Here’s a man who is taking the concerns of Godalming people seriously, very seriously. 

A man, as you will see from this e-mail sent to Godalming Conservative supporters, that the Tories want to get rid of.

Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 09.34.14

A sea change washes over Alfold? – But nothing to do with Care Ashore.


Word on the street – or, in this case, the lanes – is that there has been something of a sea change in Alfold. That tiny little village (population circa 1059 in the 2011 Census) has, it would appear, finally thrown in the towel and decided that it might be better to – whisper it who dares – attempt to work with the Dunsfold Developer rather than oppose it every millimetre of the way!

Could these petrol heads soon be on their way to Dunsfold? Not if -some of the neighbours – have anything to do with it?

Long may it last … although if Little Britton of Protect Our Waverley (POW) gets his way and is parachuted into the Chair of the Parish Council in May, the truce may be short-lived – very short-lived!

Although, according to our informant, even the current Chair of the Parish Council had clearly had enough of the preening Little Britton Aka (POW). He recently attempted to throw a spoke in the wheel of the council’s bid to make peace with the Dunsfold Developer and offer its support for the latest application in relation to the Aerodrome.

Who the blazes does this arrogant little pipsqueak think he is? Unless we’re very much mistaken – and, if we are, we’ll apologise – both the Aerodrome and the Dunsfold Developer were in situ long before those Johnny-Come-Latelys, Little Britton and his wife, rocked up at their des res overlooking the airfield.

No sooner had Cranleigh Removals driven out the gates of Hall Place Farm than Little Britton and his wife had signed up to the Provisional Wing of Protect Our Waverley, intent on blasting the development of anything at the Aerodrome to kingdom come. But didn’t care an s*d  about the green fields of Cranleigh, Farnham, Ewhurst, Godalming’s Arons’s Hill, Milford Golf course, and now more Ewhurst countryside going under more concrete!

The usual suspects from the Provisional Wing of POW were naturally salivating at the prospect of yet more rabid NIMBYs joining their ranks and laid out the red (or do we mean green?) carpet and embarked on yet another orgy of self-congratulation.

Talking of Protect our Waverley, where are they when they’re needed? We seek them here, we seek them there, the poor beleaguered residents of Milford, Farnham, Godalming, Cranleigh and Ewhurst seek them everywhere but that rather unsavoury and steadily dwindling band of one-trick ponies seems to have evaporated in a puff of smoke on the steps of the High Court, with Little Britton now trying, mendaciously and repeatedly, to claim he’s nothing to do with them and hasn’t been for a very long time.

Just in case – he’s missed this clip and he’s conveniently forgotten his membership we will remind him here…

Screen Shot 2019-02-21 at 10.33.57.png

Isn’t it high time someone prosecuted Protect our Waverley under the Trades Description Act?!

Because as sure as hell it ain’t doing what it says on the can!

Politics with a Big P has been kicked out of Cranleigh Parish Council.






Once upon a time in La, La Land – where nothing is quite what it seems – Politics with a Big P has been kicked out of Cranleigh Parish Council!

Hurrah! Hurrah! The Parish Council has had a Eureka moment you might think … or maybe not!

We’re told, the Tory councillors in Cranleigh have issued a press release advising the Cranleigh voting fodder that all former Tory councillors will now call themselves INDEPENDENTS and are no longer to be under the cosh of their Tory masters!

If you believe that you’ll believe anything! Including that Mary Poppins was a saucy sex slave to Mr Banks’ evil banker!

Hold the bunting! Now regular readers will know that we, at the Waverley Web, hate to pee on anyone’s fireworks but over here in Farnham the Town Council has been playing these pretend war games for years – whilst all the time covertly running one of the slickest, most politically motivated outfits in the borough, as fully paid-up members of the Provisional Wing of the Surrey Tory Tossers (PSWTT).

mylittlepovey2The mutter in the Cranleigh gutter is that the Chairman of the Cranleigh Branch of Guildford Conservatives is spitting horsy-nuts over disenchanted Tory candidates behaving so churlishly, and so ungratefully so soon after the selection process to stand for Waverley borough and Cranleigh parish council seats as CONSERVATIVES. In fact, it’s rumoured he’s so cross he almost fell off his Little Pony!

So what will change? Well, wannabe Cranleigh parish councillors will now have to print and distribute their own election leaflets and pay their own election expenses. Holy Moses! Can it really be true that the party of the Duck House Debacle is really eschewing the truffle trough of election expenses?! Surely not!

Word on Cranleigh’s HGV over-burdened streets predicts the Tories believe they might just be in trouble – big trouble – in the True Blue Tory Heartland and that there may be challenges afoot from numerous Independents of the real kind – the WYSIWYG (what-you-see-is-what-you-get), does what it says on the can variety as opposed to the ones who simply doff their Tory-Tosser hats at parish meetings and pop them back on again at borough meetings.

Maybe it’s time to remind these dyed in the wood die-hards what the word INDEPENDENT actually means?


The so-called non-political Farnham Town Council recently parachuted in a well-known Tory councillor following the resignation of another female Tory councillor only months before the election. Other Tory Tosser councillors were dragged from their death beds to prevent the seat being snaffled up by a true Independent or any other party because keeping Farnham Tory controlled was deemed imperative.

The same happened in Godalming, only last year when Godalming’s then-Mayor and Waverley’s EXECUTIVE was convicted of child abuse and sent to jail. But – Shock! Horror! –  Liberal Democrat Paul Follows snatched the seat from the Tory Tosser’s grasp after a hard-fought By-Election. Now there is a full-on Tory attack – to “Wash That Man Right Out of Our Hair.”

We would have so much more admiration for the newly declared Cranleigh Independents if they had carried their Independence Day declarations all the way to Waverley Towers. But, no doubt, they were fearful of being exposed to the cold hard light of day that greets opposition councillors. They would have their comfort blankets whipped away and would miss Good Riddance’s whiplashing their buttocks in their new Fifty Shades of Grey – or do we mean blue? – world!



D-Day for drilling in Dunsfold.


As the locals gear up for yet another fight – we bring you the latest mutter in the gutter about Dunsfold village’s new drilling site. Whilst villagers get themselves into fight mode, the oil exploration company UK Oil & Gas (UKOG) has revealed more details of its proposed new drilling site in what it describes as Dunsfold’s…

Screen Shot 2019-03-08 at 21.13.03.png

The site chosen is next to woodland north of Dunsfold Aerodrome and the test track of Top Gear.

Screen Shot 2019-03-08 at 21.13.38.png

UKOG described the well site location as “a discreet field” in “tranquil landscape”. It is off High Loxley Road, a “narrow, winding rural lane, lined with hedgerows and mature trees”.

The company said in the leaflet it had agreed to a land lease and would shortly submit a full planning application to Surrey County Council. If successful, it hoped to begin work late this year or early in 2020.

Which should coincide quite nicely with the start of development of 1,800 homes now consented and planned at the nearby aerodrome?

UKOG said the proposed well site and site access would be screened by woodland,   a small linear area of ancient woodland lies to the north of the site. It was the proximity of proposed oil drilling to ancient woodland which prompted the Environment Secretary, Michael Gove, to decide not to renew a lease on Forestry Commission land last year for an exploration site near Leith Hill, also in Surrey.

There are 13 listed buildings within 1km of the site. Land immediately to the north of the site is designated as an Area of High Archaeological Potential. There is also evidence of a buried Roman settlement 500m south of the site, UKOG says.

Dunsfold Google Maps large


UKOG has said it did not need to frack the well because the rock was naturally fractured. It said it may use an acid wash to clean the fractures after drilling. This would use acetic acid, the acid contained in vinegar.

Single well and/or sidetrack

 UKOG said it was seeking initial permission just to drill and flow test one well, “on a limited size well pad”.

But details of working hours and lorry movements referred to drilling an additional side-track, or horizontal well. The purpose of the drilling was to “to find much-needed oil and gas for the UK’s energy security,” and if the operation were successful, the local community could benefit by up to £1m a year in benefits paid by the company in business rates and royalties.

 UKOG has given no more details on the depth of the proposed well but has confirmed that three wells were drilled locally in the 1980s and it aimed to assess their commercial viability. Those wells were drilled on the other side of the aerodrome off Loxwood Rd, Alfold.

A drilling rig said to be up to 37m, would be on site for no more than 60 days. The rest of the equipment was described as low rise and low visual.

The village of Dunsfold has no street lighting. But UKOG said the well site would be lit. It said:

“We will continual monitor the lighting arrangements to ensure we avoid any unacceptable light pollution”

New road junction

The company would need to build a new junction in High Loxley Road and what it described as minor highway improvements at the junction of Dunsfold Road and High Loxley Road.

Two trees would need to be removed where the access track met the public highway to make space for the junction. The scheme would include a 1km compacted stone access track from the road to the well site.

The site itself would be built from compacted stone, surrounded by containment ditches and security fencing with entrance gates, the company said.

Air quality

The company concedes that it would use diesel-fuelled plant and machinery and that gas from the well may be flared. 

Objectors claim: “These operations will result in the release of pollutants to atmosphere and greenhouse gas emissions with a consequential air quality impact.”

The planning application would include an air quality assessment with modelling to show the impact on people and wildlife nearby.

Subsidiary company

The operation would be carried out through a UKOG subsidiary, UKOG (234) Ltd. This is named after PEDL234, the exploration licence area in which the site is based. The PEDL also includes UKOG’s Broadford Bridge well site. Accounts for the year ending December 2017 reported a loss of £2.76m, compared with a loss of £76,000 for the year before.

 Proposed operations, timings and lorry movements

 UKOG proposes the following work at Dunsfold if granted planning permission:

Phase 1

Access and well site construction: 14 weeks, 7am-7pm Monday-Friday; 9am-1pm Saturday, up to 10 heavy goods vehicles (HGV)/day

Phase 2

Drilling mobilisation: 3 weeks, 7am-7pm Monday-Friday; 9am-1pm Saturday, up to 10 heavy goods vehicles (HGV)/day

Drilling: 12 weeks, 24 hours, every day, up to 10 heavy goods vehicles (HGV)/day

Drilling demobilisation: 3 weeks, 7am-7pm Monday-Friday; 9am-1pm Saturday, up to 10  HGV’s.

Well testing: 26 weeks, 24 hours, every day, up to 5 HGV’s. 

Sidetrack drilling: 12 weeks, 24 hours, every day, up to 10 HGV’s. 

Maintenance workover: 4 weeks, 24 hours, every day, up to 10 HGV’s.

Phase 3

Plugging and abandonment: 3 weeks, 24 hours, every day, up to 10 HGV’s.

Removal of surface equipment: 2 weeks, 7am-7pm Monday-Friday; 9am-1pm Saturday, up to 5 HGV’s. 

Phase 4

Site restoration: 5 weeks, 7am-7pm Monday-Friday; 9am-1pm Saturday, up to 10 HGV’s. 

Or Site retention: 26 weeks, no working hours are given, no lorry movements given, to allow for further application for additional work or production.

Lorry movements, though not stated, are presumed to be two-way.

Public reaction

Online video footage showed that some people seeking to attend the information meeting were not allowed in. Some people complained that the writing in the information leaflet was too small to read easily.

There was also disappointment that the leaflet was no available online or in digital format for people who had been unable to attend the meeting. The leaflet is now available here

UKOG has distributed a questionnaire and DrillOrDrop will ask the company for the analysis of the results.


Surrey County Council ruled on 28 February 2019 that the UKOG proposals for Dunsfold do not need an environmental impact assessment.

Details of the application for a screening request (SO/2019/0002) are on the Waverley Borough Council planning website (search by the request reference)


More prats deserting Waverley’s sinking Tory ship?



With the sound of election drums rolling  across the the borough yet another Hindhead councillor has jumped off the good ship, Waverley.

Councillor Christiaan Hesse’s term as councillor for Hindhead ended just a couple of days ago on March 10th – less than two months before the full council seeks re-election in the May polls.

His sudden departure leaves only Cllr Peter Isherwood (pictured below) carrying the Tory flag for Hindhead.Screen Shot 2019-03-12 at 23.01.49.png

 October last year saw,  another Tory Town Councillor Alex Ford booted out of office for non-attendance.

During his year-long term of office, he did not attend a single meeting! 

What a slap in the face for the residents of Haslemere, battling to retain the countryside from the threat of development?

Tory Councillor Peter Isherwood threw his hat into the ring and won the seat on Haslemere Town Council in a by-election.

Will the people of Haslemere vote for more of the same at a Town Council by-election to-day?

Is this the reason, Councillor Hesse too, is no longer a councillor? Or, has he fallen out of the Tory fold after showing his increasing frustration with many of its decisions?

Screen Shot 2019-03-12 at 23.16.14.png

Perhaps it is time the townsfolk of Haslemere were better served by their elected representatives?

Maybe, just maybe they will stop voting for anyone with a blue rosette regardless, and seek proper representation from those willing to give their time and energies to serve those they have a duty to represent?

And possibly, some of those so long in the tooth, and frankly verging on decrepid, would do themselves, and the rest of us, a big favour by taking up bridge or knitting! 

Where has all the money gone Part 2?​


Some of the locals have been pouring over The Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust – AKA Cranleigh Village Private Nursing Home Trust’s – annual accounts. But, as per usual, this document throws up more questions than answers … A bit like the recent public meeting, despite an excellent presentation by Cranleigh’s Parish Clerk.

You can read that here: Where has all the money gone? Where has all the money gone?

No wonder the Lions Club is asking for its money back.Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 19.39.58.png

The accounts have not been examined by forensic accountants, just Derby & Joan, who found them remarkably vague and underwhelming when it comes to any substance or detail.  All items in black are taken from the CVHT 2018 accounts.

The net assets of the company are stated to be £2,621.656 which is, apparently, all down to the value of the land sold by Cranleigh Parish Council for £1.

Yep, you did read that right. Cranleigh Village Private Nursing Home Trust is valued at £2,621.656 based on its purchase of land from Cranleigh Parish Council for a mere £1!

Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 13.41.03.png

DAYLIGHT ROBBERY or something more sinister? The word fraud comes to mind but we don’t want to be hasty …

What nincompoop sold the Parish silver for a measly £1? Particularly when it was valued by the District Valuer at the time at £250,000!

However, CVHT’s valuation figure is entirely false. As we understand this is a perceived value of the land when planning permission for a hospital, day hospital and GP Surgery was granted in 2006.

A consent which lapsed in 2012.

Therefore there is currently no planning permission for any development on the land. So what is its value? 

Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 19.24.36.pngStaff costs totalled £24,809 in 2018 which included pension contributions when £7,103 of goods were sold.

Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 19.27.22.png

So exactly what were these charitable activities? No explanation is given.

It would appear that Trustee & President Nick Vrijland and wife, have been receiving £12,000 pa and then £9,000 pa in rent for the CVHT shop since its inception – which they conveniently own – until the last few trading, months when it plummeted to £2,250. Yet villagers had been led to believe the shop’s premises were being donated by a generous benefactor. Instead, one of the charity’s Trustees was making money out of the Trust. Conflict of interest or what?

Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 19.30.02.png

Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 19.30.58.pngIt is well known within the village that the much-lauded “excellent” relationship that CVHT claims to have with Cranleigh Parish Council and The League of Friends DOES NOT exist. Parish records reveal there have been numerous acrimonious exchanges with parish councillors, over the lack of transparency and information. The League of Friends members sought the resignation of CVHT chairman Robin Fawkner Corbett from The League after CVHT  wanted to forge closer links with The League, including taking over or “combining” its £2m+  funds with the Trust’s meagre funds!

The League’s chairman, Diana Davis, also resigned from CVHT!

 Several of The League’s members have informed the WW that it will, NOT,  UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES hand over funds it has collected from villagers in and around Cranleigh since the 1950s to anyone, in particular, the CVHT.

So, not content with snaffling all the funds Cranleigh residents and businesses raised for a replacement Cottage Hospital, the Privately Owned Care Home they are being fobbed off with is now hell-bent on gaining from the monies the villagers have raised for the existing Cottage Hospital. Funds which continue to be used to serve the local population in a way that the new Care Home cannot, will not and does not want to.

So it would seem that the Trustees are upping their game from DAYLIGHT ROBBERY to DEMANDING MONEY WITH MENACE!

Talk about a farce … it would be funny if it wasn’t so damn’d serious!

Accounts claim that…Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 19.36.07.png So why are the beds now being made available to the residents of Surrey?

Risk identified by the Trust.

Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 19.53.06.png

Which quite obviously means, that without consent to build A2Dominion’s (a client of one of the Trustee’s company) that the residential accommodation for health workers, from far and wide,  which contravenes the parish council covenant, this part of the scheme fails!

Screen Shot 2019-03-11 at 19.35.47.pngLast but not least?

Screen Shot 2019-03-10 at 19.58.30

All we can say is. If WIGWAM has been paid for keeping everyone informed, it would appear WIGWAM has remained comfortably ensconced inside its tent! 


A bit more election fact checking. FACT OR FICTION?










Screen Shot 2019-03-05 at 16.14.14.png

Your Godalming & Milford Lib Dem Candidates. More details later 


Here’s one we made earlier with the help of Godalming Tories. It’s the time of year for a little fact checking. Fact or Fiction?

Here at the Waverley Web, we do love the fact that it’s so clearly more about removing THE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT Paul Follows than anything remotely to do with the ward or its people!



Guess what – Surrey is not as wealthy as people think.


Surrey is not as wealthy or healthy as many people think it is, says the county council’s leader. 

Speaking at Surrey’s Health and Wellbeing Board recently Tim Oliver said: “Many people see Surrey as a leafy, wealthy and healthy county and for a huge part of it that is the case.

“But there are huge parts of significant pockets of deprivation.”

However, David Munro – Surrey’s Police & Crime Commissioner contradicted him saying – Surrey is a wealthy community – and should be doing more to deal with its drug-related problems.

With 1.1 million people living in Surrey, it is still one of the most densely populated shire counties in England with “pockets of deprivation”.

Figures show there are over 23,000 children in Surrey living in poverty and 10,600 five to 15-year-olds have a mental health disorder. It has an ageing population, with dementia a particular issue.

In the next 10 years, the number of people aged 65 and over is expected to rise by 18% and the number of carers aged 85 and over will increase by 31%. Data from the strategy states that in 2015 approximately one in 25 people aged over 65 lived in care homes in Surrey with the figure expected to rise by 60% by 2030.

However, he failed to mention that the vast number of those living in Surrey’s care homes not only fund their own care but also subsidise huge numbers of other under-funded county council- residents’ packages of care!

He claimed the county had missed out on funding in the past because areas of deprivation were not always seen and hoped that a review of Fairer Funding for local authorities taking this into account would open up more funding channels for Surrey.

He said the “strong average performance” of people leading healthier lives in the county masks areas where there was inequality.

He also fails to mention the large number of Surrey residents who fund their own private healthcare! And, who work for free, and support the large  voluntary sector.

Criticising the Council’s 10-year Strategy, David Munro, Surrey’s Police and Crime Commissioner, said it did not do enough to tackle the effect of drugs.

He said: “The effect of drugs is not given the priority it clearly needs. We all know drugs are a danger to the user, a danger to their family and friends and a danger to the community. We have a duty as a wealthy community in Surrey to stamp on this much more than we have been doing.”

However, Helen Atkinson, director of public health, said drugs were prioritised in the plan which looked at tackling substance misuse including the “huge problem” of alcohol use in the county.

Who are you putting your money on? Captain Potts or Captain Bob?


Getting Waverley’s Local Plan over the finish line is a bit like a Carry On Film – ‘Carry on Regardless!’



        Waverley’s Leader – Cllr Julia Potts – v – 


 Captain Bob Lies, or is it Able Semen master of all he surveys at the helm of  SS Protect Our Waverley. 

Here’s an interesting quote from Captain Julia aboard SS Waverley in response to a Government sanction on councils, including Waverley, for under delivering its housing supply.


Does she realise this could mean less housing in the long run, but MORE houses in the short-term to accommodate the Waverley buffer? 
Are the Neighbourhood Plans actually threatened? Most quotas contained in the Neighbourhood Plans of Waverley’s towns and villages have already been met!

Hmm… interesting…very interesting? You can read why in the link below.

Waverley has been sanctioned by the Government for under delivering its housing supply.
Lady at the helm of Good Ship Waverley – Julia Potts, said:

“This news is obviously extremely disappointing for us, but we will, of course, be vigorously defending our adopted Local Plan; the plan we believe represents the best possible vision for the borough’s future.
“It means we can work in partnership with the borough’s towns and parishes to develop Neighbourhood Plans, so communities can mould new development where they live. It means we can safeguard our borough against inappropriate development.
“It should be remembered that Waverley did not bring this legal action, but we have to defend both the borough and town and parish councils, whose Neighbourhood Plans are now threatened by this action. We all want appropriate plan-led development and we did everything possible at the inspection to defend a lower housing number.
“It is extremely disappointing that a few determined individuals continue to raise these legal challenges, despite the High Court upholding the Local Plan following the hearing in October 2018 and despite it having been approved by a government inspector.
“We are committed to preserving and protecting the adopted Local Plan. It will remain our principal planning document and continue to guide our planning decisions.”

It’s the time of year for a​ little fact checking. Fact or Fiction?


herbertwells-front-the-invisible-man-1529161114658Have you read any good works of fiction lately?

 Had any leaflets thrust through your letterboxes?

Now – we all know that Godalming’s Tory  Councillors work tirelessly for us here in the town that is home to Waverley Towers…

Don’t we?

We will completely ignore the fact that one of our Tory Godalming borough and town councillors is presently residing as a guest of Her Majesty and was forced to hand over his Town Council mayoral chain and seat to others!  Because it might be churlish to mention it? So whisper who dares.

However, we will not sit idly by and ignore the lies, damn lies and statistics being scattered like mildew seed corn through the doors of townsfolk. Leaflets, funded by Tory HQ and featured below.

“Hard work behind the scenes saving Green Oaks School?”

WW can tell you who put in the hard work. Green Oaks PTA – parents, and Godalming’s new boy on the block – Cllr Paul Follows!

Ten out of Ten to the Tories for coming up with a work of fiction so well-crafted it should qualify for its own series on Netflix featuring the silent superhero Cllr Andrew Bolton. A man rarely seen and seldom heard. A man from whom residents’ questions seldom receive an acknowledgement, let alone a reply.  He’s pictured below with Busbridge’s own Invisible Man, Cllr Peter Martin, someone so busy and multi -hatted, he’s never been seen in public! Except of course like now – at election time! Or perhaps when resigning as SCC chairman after apologising and admitting he had shown a lack of “cultural awareness and good judgement” in an interview for a member of staff.  

Well, folks – together with Andrew-Bolton from the Blue – they have just shown another example of ” lack of good judgement.” Because the residents of Godalming cannot be fooled!

Tales of the unexpected as Surrey’s Mr Tickle resigns.

The disingenuous triple-hatted politician – Surrey County,  Waverley Borough and Godalming Town Council –  Peter Martin had been briefing local politicians that Green Oaks School would CLOSE. Indeed his note to Jeremy Hunt MP tipped him off that CLOSURE  would be the CERTAIN outcome of the ‘public consultation’.  

MP and Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt then sent out this  ill-advised press comment:

“It is a great shame that Green Oaks CofE Primary School is set to close and I fully appreciate the concerns of parents who are understandably worried about what will happen to their children and where they will continue their education.

Surrey County Council and the diocese did not take this decision lightly but regrettably the fact remains that the number of pupils are down and in these difficult financial times, the council feels it can better use this resource at an alternative school,” he said.

“I have been assured that the Diocese of Guildford, Surrey CC, and local councillors are trying to do all they can to support the school and its community during this difficult time.”

We understand Peter Martin had tried to brief local councillors in an email seen by us saying:

“It has been agreed that in the best interest of the community involved, all public statements will not scapegoat or blame. There is no party political gain here and Peter guarantees that his party will be silent on this issue and the Lib Dems would also be silent.”

That campaign turned out well for them then!

Because the Lib Dems were anything but silent – putting their weight firmly behind Godalming parents and Green Oaks was saved from the Tory axe.

WW thinks this comment says it all!  As we have said so often in the past. TELL THE TRUTH OR SOMEONE WILL TELL IT FOR YOU.

Screen Shot 2019-03-08 at 15.43.01.png


image2.jpegOur advice to Godalming Tories – and for that matter other politicians of any party that try to dupe the public.


Where has all the money gone?


Where has all the money gone, long time passing?
Where has all the money gone, long time ago?
Where has all the money gone?
CVHT has robbed us all, every one
Oh, when will the Parish Council ever learn, when will WE ever learn?


Screen Shot 2019-03-07 at 08.36.32.png

A Cranleigh Lion holds aloft a picture of the cheque it handed over to Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust as Adrian Clarke (left) asks for the Lions a highly respected local organisation to have its money returned. It wants to give it to the deserving people it suports – and not a commercial care home and community beds for Surrey people!



That’s what the majority of Cranleigh residents, who queued up on a cold, dank Wednesday evening waiting to enter the Village Hall, wanted to know.

The Parish Council was responsible for the hold-up. One dressed as a Leprechaun was busy flipping backwards and forwards through the Electoral Roll handing out yellow slips to Cranleigh residents who were obliged to give name, rank and house number to confirm their eligibility to speak at the meeting. Damn – we left our arachnoid dental records behind…again!

‘Next!’ said the Leprechaun briskly. ‘Not a Cranleigh resident? Well, you can come in but you’re not permitted to speak. Next …’

Who do these people think they are?

They kept the public – most of whom were the wrong side of 60 – waiting for up to half an hour, in the drizzle, to enter a public building for a meeting called by THE PUBLIC and then told them who could speak, how often and for how long!

Did we miss something?

We thought these people were elected by the people of Cranleigh to represent the people of Cranleigh, not to dictate to them. As for the Leprechaun …. well, what can we say? We, at the Waverley Web, have always maintained that put a blue rosette on a donkey and the people of Waverley would vote for it but a Leprechaun … ‘What the *uck’s that all about?’ as the youngest, newest (and most uncouth) recruit to the Waverley Web’s growing network of correspondents said!

Once the audience finally gained their seats and the meeting commenced it was running half an hour late thanks to the Leprechaun’s antics with the yellow slips. Did she not realise that most people were on a tight schedule, hoping to be home in time to watch BBC2’s much-trailered Mother, Father, Son?

Chairman of the Parish Council, Liz Townsend, informed the meeting that – and we hasten to add we paraphrase – that the Parish Council didn’t really want to be there but they’d been forced to call the meeting by six parishioners who’d demanded one. Plebs!

We won’t bore you with the bylaws that were invoked, suffice to say the Parish Council were there under duress. Oh, and by the way, no one from Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust (CVHT) had been prepared to attend and ‘face the music’. Nor, for that matter, was anyone from HC-One there either – the private care home provider that is benefiting from the largess of Cranleigh residents who fund-raised for a new village hospital and day hospital but are being palmed off with a private care home, in case you’re wondering. There’s an expression for it:

daylight robbery!

It was left to Adrian Clark, on behalf of Cranleigh Lions, to point out that the Lions had given CVHT a whopping £45,000, the largest single donation Cranleigh Lions had ever made – apparently, the biggest donation they usually make is circa £500, just to put their munificence into perspective. And Jim McAllister, on behalf of Dunsfold Park, who pointed out that his company had provided, both in kind and in cash, the equivalent of circa £140,000 to CVHT.

Both donors made it abundantly clear that whilst they had been enthusiastic supporters of CVHT when they had understood the trustees to be raising money to provde a new hospital to replace the existing cottage hospital, they would not have been remotely supportive had they been aware that CVHT was going to fritter their donations on a highly successful, privately owned, for-profit care home which could well afford to finance its own money-making enterprise.

Both gentlemen said they wanted their money back so that it could be redistributed to other, more needy and worthwhile local charities. Good point well made Messrs Adrian Clarke and Jim McAllister. Cranleigh residents were heartily behind them and demonstrated their support with ringing applause.

There were, of course, a few stooges in the audience who sang the praises of the proposal to build a new, privately owned, for-profit care home – Parish Councillor Rosemary Burrbridge  being one of them – but the majority of the audience wanted to know why the Parish Council had sold Parish owned land to CVHT for £1 and why it had, later, not enforced the covenant attached to the sale of the land and taken the land back when it had the opportunity to do so?

Another important question that no one asked is why there was a ransom strip around the land which was exchanged, who put it there and who benefits from it? But we’ll come to that later.

Unfortunately, none of those Parish Councillors who were present were Parish Councillors at the time that the land swap was effected and although the Clerk had done a sterling job trawling through the paperwork and past Minutes in order to provide a chronology of where we are and how we got here more might have been achieved if the architects of the scheme – namely Needless to say Patricia wife of the late Brian – former parish council chairman and herself a parish councillor at the time kept shtumn.

Nick Vrijland (President of CVHT and, we believe after some trawling of our own, the beneficiary of the aforementioned Ransom Strip)
Robin Fawkner-Corbett (Chairman of CVHT)
John Bainbridge (Trustee)
David Graham-Smith (Trustee)
Andy Leahy (Trustee)
Brian Cheesman (Trustee)
David Barry (Trustee)
Nigel Roberts (Trustee)

Christina Pearce (between 2002 and June 2018 Christina was the administrator, volunteer coordinator, gift shop manager, fundraiser, secretary to the Trustees and general factotum of CVHT – a position for which she was paid handsomely – some claim far too handsomely and that was where a lot of CVHT’s funds went!) –

had been present to answer questions from the public.

If only these Trustees (who are, predominantly, pale, male and stale and, in some cases, former members of Cranleigh Parish Council) had had the courtesy and the courage to attend the meeting and give an account of themselves and their actions, Cranleigh residents might have felt it was worth their while turning out. As it was, they might just as well have stayed home and tuned into Coronation Street for all the good it did them. There are already calls for another PUBLIC meeting to be chaired by THE PUBLIC at which CVHT will be, TOLD,  NOT ASKED – to turn up!

In the past, Mr Vrijland has enjoyed strutting around the village making a great deal of his status as a so-called benefactor to the people of Cranleigh but where was he last night? Neither he nor Mr Leafy – who have both made a shed-load of dosh out of Cranleigh by developing the former West Cranleigh Nurseries, AKA the Knowle Park Initiative, were anywhere to be seen. And not a peep out of either of them about their extra-curricular development activities in Cranleigh in their profiles on the CVHT website. Coy or just deliberately hiding their bushels of cash out of the light?

Now here’s a thought: maybe, just maybe, Messrs Vrijland and Leafy would like to give back to the people of Cranleigh the £2 million local businesses, charities and residents raised and donated to CVHT so it can be redistributed to other more deserving local good causes. And, at the same time, perhaps Mr Vrijland would like to return to Cranleigh Parish Council the ransom strip he purloined along the way in the hope they will now take better care of it than Messrs Bainbridge and Cheesman did during their stewardship as Cranleigh Parish Councillors! Just a thought …

On its website CVHT tell us ‘Discussions with stakeholders highlighted the shortfall in affordable rental accommodation in the Cranleigh area for healthcare workers, leading to possible difficulties in both the recruitment and retention of staff. To overcome this, an accommodation block on the Knowle Lane site with 26 affordable units is proposed. This accommodation will be made available to anyone working in healthcare locally.’

Er, call us naive but why didn’t Messrs Vrijland and Leafy set aside 26 affordable units at their Knowle Park Initiative development for healthcare workers? Could it be something to do with them being very happy to dig deep into the pockets of Cranleigh residents but not their own …?

Some bright spark asked for a vote of those in favour of the privately owned care home. 27, yellow slip waving hands, were in favour and 12 against. We can only presume that the abstaining majority of over 150 couldn’t see the point in voting because they realised they’d been stitched up by CVHT … and we’re not talking surgical stitches here. Does it hurt? You bet it does … but only when they laugh!

And, Cranleigh people are not laughing. Particularly Andy (Flash) Photographer Webb who left before the meeting started because the man born in Cranleigh now lives in Alfold, and who contributed money like many thousands of others, from the nearby villages was told he couldn’t speak!

Wanna bet! – You sign up and log on to the Cranleigh Community Group and see for yourselves whether he can speak or not? 


Is Waverley’s Umming Bird looking for a new nesting site?



Word on the street suggests that Waverley’s Leader might be taking flight, or do we mean fright?


Despite succeeding where her predecessors have failed – in almost getting a LOCAL PLAN past the finish line, getting the Blightwells development under-way – and pushing up Waverley’s housing numbers – and the council tax – Leader Julia may be taking flight from her “safe” Tory seat in Farnham Upper Hale.

Waverley Borough Council’s Julia Potts, who is prone to a bit of umming and ahhing, is considering becoming a little more decisive in the lead-up to the May elections. She believes she may have difficulty hanging on to her seat as Farnham people are getting angry, very angry.

Some Farnham residents are even suggesting that it is time to break away from Waverley Borough Council altogether. But hasn’t Farnham already tried that with a petition to the Queen? Last we heard that petition was buried under a pile of dust and cobwebs, a bit like us here at the Waverley Web. Is it in a Government department vault, or has it gone to THE TOWER?

Council tax going up and up!

So could the public-spirited the former Pi**ed off Portfolio for Planning (POPP) be handing over his far safer seat at Frensham, Dockenfield & Tilford to his Tory colleague? Only time will tell – not long now folks.

Screen Shot 2019-03-01 at 18.27.36.png


‘Moanalot Munro gets​ mouthy after losing Surrey Police & Crime Commissioner job.


hustingsIt’s not unusual for Tory Tossers to sling their toys out of their prams when they don’t get their own way – but surely David Munro’s behaviour following his de-selection as Surrey’s Police & Crime Commissioner was a bit OTT? Even for him. Guess losing the plumply salaried job was a bit of a blow for the serial glory-seeking politician who is photographed more often than Meghan Markle. But,  to be pushed aside by a woman and Alfold’s Bobby – no longer on the beat. WOW!

Charlotte Alice Chorico – a qualified Criminal Solicitor beat Alfold’s  Waverley Borough Councillor Kevin Deanus to take the top nomination, by just a narrow margin – 20 votes.

Was DM about to take defeat gracefully? Not bloody likely – with a face like a slapped arse it was obvious to everyone involved he wanted to stamp his DM’s all over both of them. He believed having shoved up the council tax to employ 100 more officers for the county – saying – “I want to win again like I did in 2016” his future job was in the bag?

The arrogant Mr Munro asked the lady in waiting:


“Why if the incumbent is doing such a good job, can you justify standing against him. When she replied:

Said Charlotte Alice Chorico: “It’s called democracy.”


At which point she was selected and DM threw down his rattle and his jellycat and stomped off without congratulating his successor.

After one questioner from SW Surrey Conservatives asked  Mr Munro what he would do about the potholes in the lovely area of Waverley? Perhaps someone should tell the dozey Cllr TT Jeanette Stennett – That roads are a county matter and nothing whatsoever to do with the Police.

Another member present said that he found the partisan behaviour displayed by sections of the audience rather distasteful. He claimed that Guildford councillors seemed to be mainly supporting Kevin Deanus while those from SW Surrey remained loyal to David Munro, who in 2016 recaptured the role of PCC for the Conservatives from an Independent. Saying afterwards: “He had won the position back and was hung out to dry.”

Guildford Conservative Association chairman Bob Hughes, who was also at the selection meeting said: “In choosing our Police Commissioner Candidate, Surrey Conservatives had three excellent people to choose from.

“Cllr Kevin Deanus is a leading figure in Guildford Conservatives and I know that many turned out to support him, but Charlie [Chorico] is clearly a rising star who will be an excellent commissioner, and I know that Guildford will support her enthusiastically.

Perhaps not all Captain Bob?

Youth Crime and hate crime is rising in Cranleigh New Town and the Eastern Villages.

PS. Does this now mean the DM will be haunting Farnham’s doorsteps in the May elections? Oh! No – not again – we thought he had given us up years ago?

The donors of £1.5m want to know why their ‘HOSPITAL & Day Hospital’ has​ morphed into a PRIVATE CARE HOME and 20 beds for the people of Surrey?



Village leaders have agreed to calls from the public to allow them to hold a Public Meeting.

Six residents including Mr Terence Bachelor asked for a meeting to be held.

 The Parish Council might find themselves in the hot seat when they are required to provide some answers to the residents of Cranleigh and nearby villages. 

Let’s hope The Cranleigh Village Hospital Trustees will tell it as it is, and attempt  to satisfy residents concerns too?


  • Meetings in 2013 with the Charity were held in SECRET by the late Brian Ellis former CPC Chairman – where a  Restrictive Covenant on the land transfer was changed, despite the concern of councillors Ken and Ruth Reed. 

He said: “As much as we trust our parish council to work in the interest of the village, we can see this project changing.”

WHY? Has the Chamber of Trade changed its view? Secretary Jane O’Leary said: “Residents are frustrated by an apparent lack of openness.”

A REPLACEMENT THE HOSPITAL for which villagers fundraised over £1.5m  has now morphed into something very different.  Proving those earlier concerns were founded.

Now residents want to know, WHY  parish land sold for £1 – will now be handed over on a platter by CVHT to HC-One headed by Mr Chai Patel – a national Care Management Group owners of 350 homes with 19,000 residents.


Planning for an  80-bed Private Care Home, and 20 Community Beds has met numerous delays, having been promised as a replacement for Cranleigh Hospital and Day Hospital for almost 20 years! Now exasperated villagers say they have waited – “long enough for answers” despite numerous attempts to extract them  from the Charity by the Cranleigh Community Group – the Village noticeboard.

Now, the muddy waters of Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust’s scheme have become mired in further controversy following a posting by Cranleigh Society Secretary – Sue Dale, with answers provided by CVHT.

The following throws up more questions than the answers.

Screen Shot 2019-03-02 at 17.36.54

  • So the charity does not actually know how the 20 beds will be used – or who is going to pay for them? Really!
  • So – the NHS will not commit to anything until the planning permission is in place?  No risk there then?
  • So there is no legal, binding agreement with the county council either? Because it will depend on where the need comes from? Bizarre!
  • So exactly what is the model of care?
  • Is a 5-year contract – which is non-existent and renewable every five years going to satisfy Waverley Planners? Does it intend to grant planning permission on a WING and a PRAYER?
  • The CCG (Care Commissioning Group will approve and allocate beds? What exactly is a “cross-section” of requirement?
  • How will they prioritise the residents Of Cranleigh and villages? Keep beds open just in case?
  • HC-ONE will provide the CARE? – What CARE – NURSING CARE? Care homes are staffed by Carers – not State Registered Nurses.  CRANLEIGH VILLAGE HOSPITAL HAD A MATRON – SISTERS – STAFF NURSES!
  • Dr Falkner Corbett claims Cranleigh Village Hospital will have an MRI Scanner soon? CVHT is nothing to do with the League of Friends. How will the League of Friends be raising the money? From the public? and who will that scanner be used by? Surrey residents?
  • A 26 – room hostel block added to the scheme will be provided for Surrey care workers?  

Chai Patel owner of HC-ONE was recently quoted as saying:

“Investing in the Care Home Sector can still be a winner.”

Sounds like a winner for you Mr Patel – and a loser for the village dubbed by Waverley as “Poor old Cranleigh.’

Because Court Canvedish which owns HC-ONE has just sold off all its UK Social Care business to Australian Pensions Giant AMP and is seeking a buyer for its CARE HOME business HC-ONE. So could the proposed new partner of Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust be an Ozzie – or the Chinese – or the Russians?

The other winner is Surrey County Council. Closes down a 65-bed Nursing and Dementia Home – and takes 20 community beds with the NHS on a budget which has not been approved and operated by HC-ONE – a private provider. SCC sells its Longfields, Cranleigh site for – housing? and trousers the money?

The Waverley Web will be at the meeting. Hanging as usual, from one of the dusty corners of Cranleigh Village Hall – if we can find it?animated-spider-image-0201




The locals are gearing up for yet another Dunsfold protest.



Screen Shot 2019-02-26 at 11.06.07.png

Here at the Waverley Web, we took the news seriously – hence this post... Is Dunsfold Village’s very own Drill or Drop – on its way?

Apparently, Dunsfold Parish Council knew about the proposal a week or so before we, and the community, heard about it, but decided it didn’t warrant further attention!!!

However, John Grey, the Parish and WBC Councillor realised this was a serious matter and needed attention. He alerted Waverley, submitted questions to UKOG and turned up at the public meeting last Sunday.

However, Dunsfold Parish Councillor Stephen Haines did turn up for the public meeting.  One of the guys pictured next to the serving hatch we believe?

Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 15.06.09.pngDunsfold doesn’t normally get 120 or so people turning out on a Sunday to meetings so it looks like the parish pump wallers may now be taking things seriously?

Congratulations Beverley. Another act in the Awfold pantomime ?

They obviously don’t want oil wells, as well as thousands of homes in their backyards? No doubt all the usual parish councils will be working with Protect Our Waverley, and Crystal Tips Weddell will be collecting shedloads more taxpayers’ cash to fund the fight? Just to recap – last time she collected £276,000 to fight off development at Dunsfold Aerodrome- so that £50,000 VAT could be reclaimed and paid out to lawyers to fight ‘Your Waverley who gives them the Precept, to help them to do so!

Go girl go?

Residents heard  UK Oil and Gas outline its plans to drill for oil near Dunsfold village at the aptly named site – PRATTS CORNER? However, opponents of oil exploration across southern England stirred up the locals to challenge the company about its plans in the village.

Environmentalist, Nicola Peel, who campaigned against UKOG’s operation at Broadford Bridge, told the audience:

“You need to ask UKOG very specific questions.”

John Gray, the village’s representative on Waverley Borough Council, said:

“It is very much down to people of Dunsfold to get themselves organised”.

Well – he should know a thing or two about that! He has been working, behind the scenes, with the ProtectOr Waverley Group – who together with the CPRE have been opposing development in Dunsfold for years, at huge cost to the very same borough council of which he is a member!

Julian Neal, a member of Markwells Wood Watch, said villagers should lobby their MPs and councillors. He said the Conservative MP, Penny Mordant, had supported his group’s campaign against UKOG’s proposals at Markwells Wood:

“I was able to convince Penny Mordant in a hour-and-a-half meeting of the environmental and public health dangers of the Markwells Wood proposals.”

The first indication of UKOG’s plans for Dunsfold emerged just over a week ago when letters were distributed in the village on 15 February 2019. (DrillOrDrop 

UKOG said it was looking at a site northeast of the village. It did not identify the exact location but residents described the site as Pratt’s Corner.

A Don’t Drill Dunsfold Facebook page was established within hours of the UKOG letters being distributed and Sunday’s meeting was organised days later. The venue changed to a larger room because too many people wanted to attend.

UKOG issued a press statement last week to address questions it said it was being asked about the plans for Dunsfold.

The company’s chief executive, Stephen Sanderson, said he hoped to “fully engage” with residents.  He accused, what he described as, “well-known and ill-informed scaremongers” of “circulating fiction” about the company’s plans for exploratory drilling in Dunsfold.

WW has ascertained from local records that similar Drilling took place in Alfold in the 1990s  and although there was a public outcry, exploratory drilling went ahead near the village school. It took a matter of weeks, gas was found – there was no disruption or nuisance, but no further drilling took place.

Screen Shot 2019-02-28 at 20.43.59.png

Nobody says it better​.


As the song goes…

Nobody says it half as good as you – Mr David Wylde.

However, ‘Your Waverley” is sticking to its mantra – “Blightwells Yard will be a HUUUUUUGE success – and will produce HUUUUUGE sums for the next 150 Years.

Let’s Hope the Waverley Web is still in existence so that it can give a HUUUGE round of applause to Tory-controlled Waverley and Tory Controlled Surrey Councils for making such a wise investment?

Screen Shot 2019-03-02 at 09.46.57.png

Here’s the shop situation so far. Oh and by the way. The ANCHOR STORE – Sainsbury’s – has been operating in Farnham’s South Street for donkeys (30)years! And ASK is closing restaurants all over the country. Not that we want to pee on ‘Your Waverley’s’ parade.



All roads lead to riches​ , ​don’t they? Especially when they live in Cranleahy.


Everything changes – and everything stays the same – in “Poor old Cranleigh.”

A Cranleigh resident sent us this news cutting taken from a local paper – didn’t say which one – we presume the Sorry Ad –  dated 1987?

And – you wouldn’t Adam and Eve it – but the name Nick Vrijland lept  off the page as 30 years ago when Cllr Elwyn Williams was chairman of Cranleigh ~Parish Council the Flying Dutchman wanted to do a – yes – you guessed – “a land swap.” What for – we hear you cry  – was it for a Private Nursing Home or a hospital – no it was for a “small amount of development” and a service road through Knowle Park with local builder the late Mr Gordon Thomas. 

Now – unlike the land swap that took place in 2002 – with the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust – the earlier land swap was viewed with slightly more than a little scepticism by the  Wily Cllr Williams.

However, it would appear that if you hang on in there – all your dreams will come true because the Knowle Park ~Inititative has been approved by Waverley including a new road – but the scheme has hit the buffers because the Environment Agency has objected to the owners moving the stream and upsetting the wildlife.

Perhaps the Environment Agency has decided to act as the same developer dredged the Cranleigh Waters on his West Cranleigh ~Nurseries land, which altered the flow of the river further downstream,  affecting other development in Elmbridge?

 “Oh what a tangled web you weave when once you practise to deceive.”

EA objection to Parkland 15-01-19

Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 20.27.39.pngScreen Shot 2019-01-24 at 20.28.01.png

Knowle Park1.jpegWe are including a pdf of the article you can enjoy reading it word for word. Knowle Park2

So Clogs away…

The moral of the tale: If at first you don’t succeed – try, try and try again! Because that “modest little amount of housing” became 265+. And the other little land swap for a Hospital and a Day Hospital morphed into an 80-bed Private CARE Home! We have updated our earlier post – because even we are totally confused. Because WW thought it was a NURSING HOME. Big difference – care workers not nurses!! 

Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 17.00.23.png

Waverley has been sanctioned by the Government for under delivering its housing supply.


 No surprises there then that our borough council has been sanctioned by the Government for under delivering its housing supply.  – although one might argue that, given the sausage factory panache, with which Waverley’s planners have been banging out planning consents one might be forgiven for wondering WHY?

Well, here’s part of the answer:  Here we go, here we go, here we go Ooooh!



Q Q: Why?

A: Because of all the developments already consented in Waverley approximately 400/500 of 1800 that could, and should, have been built on a brownfield site at Dunsfold Aerodrome – NONE HAVE BEEN BUILT … yet.

All thanks to the antics of that troublesome twosome – Protect our Waverley (POW) and The Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) – aided and abetted by the meddling Mistress Milton, and Jeremy SHUNT – who, shall henceforth be known as – ‘Waverley’s Old Buffers’ (WOB’s.’)  Together they were, and are,  dedicated to stopping development at Dunsfold Park so they can support building over the countryside! Had these unreconstructed NIMBYs bowed to the inevitable and accepted that the biggest brownfield site in the borough was the obvious place for housing, rather than trying to stop it by hook or by crook, housing development at the Aerodrome would now be well under way, thus enabling Waverley to demonstrate that it IS delivering on the planning consents it had granted.


One-third of local authorities face a sanction under the government’s new housing delivery test this year and these include both WAVERLEY & GUILDFORD.

The delivery test was introduced in last July’s revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). It applies sanctions to all local planning authorities that, in the three years up to the preceding April, failed to meet 95% of their housing requirement, with the severity of the sanction varying according to the extent of the under-performance.

Under the test’s criteria, all local authorities delivering under 95% of their housing requirement must now produce an action plan detailing the reasons why they are under-delivering and how they will address it. 

Those under 85% of their requirement, which includes, Waverley and Guildford, must add a 20% buffer to their five-year housing land supply requirement, instead of the usual 5% buffer, and produce an – ACTION PLAN.

Meanwhile, the worst performers – those under 25% in November 2018, rising to 45% in November 2019 and 65% in November 2020 – face the NPPF’s presumption in favour of sustainable development.


Does that mean THAT THE LAND ADJACENT TO AARONS HILL in Godalming, in the borough of Guildford  COMES BACK ONLINE?

Fortunately, none have fallen under 25% which means no local authority faces the presumption penalty – this year. Which means that 66% of councils – exactly two-thirds – have escaped any penalty at all – this year. In comparison, research by Planning last November found that 120 local authorities – 62% – would be above the 95% threshold and face no delivery test sanction at all.

Research suggests our borough is among the 38% of councils would have to produce an action plan, and is also the 31% required to have a 20% buffer in their housing land supply to boost delivery.

Has POW and CPRE (WOB’s) learnt anything from their mistakes?

Have they hell!

Having secured yet another Judicial Review into Waverley’s Local Plan, which wastes shed loads more of Waverley taxpayer’s dosh. In the interim THE WOB’s cloak themselves in yet another cost protection order (the infamous Aahrus Convention enabling NIMBYs like CPRE and POW to play fast and loose at the expense of ordinary taxpayers’ money without fear of incurring prohibitive costs.) While they increase delays in housing delivery.

The upshot is. That even if they do manage to secure a so-called victory by reducing Waverley’s housing numbers, those housing numbers will now automatically increase because of the delays in delivery. You really couldn’t make it up!




Will ‘Your Waverley’ ever learn?


WAVERLEY Borough Council has been accused of disrespecting the five employees of Farnham United Breweries who lost their lives in the First World War after painting over a commemorative plaque on the outside wall of the revamped Memorial Hall.



Screen Shot 2019-02-27 at 10.10.31.png

Taken from the Farnham Herald. 


Farnham’s new £3.27m health and wellbeing centre re-opened last year on West Street following extensive building works, provides a new home for the Brightwells Gostrey Centre for older people,  Waverley Training Services, and, where possible, its previous users.

However, as part of the work, the council repainted the outside of the building – obscuring a plaque above its main entrance dedicated to the lives of Private George William Ayres, Private Mark William George Glazier, Charles Thomas Hawkins, Frederick Charles Mansey and John Baden-Powell Wallace.

Taking umbrage at the council’s actions, Scott Bell of the Farnham Great War Group said: “The Farnham Memorial Hall has recently been enlarged and upgraded and the work is now finished.

“On the front of the hall is a memorial plaque naming the five soldiers to whom it is dedicated, all employees of Farnham United Brewery who gave their lives fighting in the Great War

“Imagine my surprise and horror to see the plaque has now been painted over in brilliant white along with the whole wall so it is not possible to read their names.

“The Farnham Great War Group visited the battlefield where he died and laid a wreath in memory of one of the men, Private GW Ayres, in 2017, exactly 100 years after he was killed.

“He has no known grave and is commemorated on the Arras War Memorial along with nearly 35,000 of his comrades who also have no known grave.

“In a way, the Memorial Hall is his known commemoration and surely all who go there should be able to read his name and the other four names of his comrades?

“Before the hall was altered the plaque stood out and was a sandstone colour contrasting with the background wall and with the names clearly legible. I am no expert but feel the plaque should be carefully cleaned and reinstated to its original form.”

Responding to Mr Bell by email, Kelvin Mills, Waverley Borough Council’s head of communities and major projects, said: “The historical relevance of the Memorial Hall to Farnham was foremost in our thoughts as the hall was being refurbished.“In fact each of our main rooms is named in memory of the five soldiers named on the memorial plaque; in addition, we have erected five silent soldiers at the forefront of the hall and embedded the history within all our marketing material.

“The plaque was painted to raise the profile of those employees who gave their lives in the Great War. It was refurbished in line with its original form. However, we agree with your description that the names are somewhat difficult to read and it is our intention to bring out the names more clearly, as we have already done with the Latin inscription above.

“We have identified a firm capable of this detailed piece of work and are looking to confirm dates when this work can be carried out.

“It is our intention to do this as soon as possible.”

Breaking News. Ewhurst Appeal at Larkfield allowed by the Government.


Screen Shot 2019-01-19 at 10.50.06

Might just as well ditch the ballot box, and all the huffing and puffing at ‘Your Waverley’ because the Government wants to blow them all down and continue to allow development in the countryside.

Ignoring the views of local residents are becoming an everyday occurrence as to-day Waverley Borough Council lose yet another planning appeal. This time for 59 homes on land outside the settlement boundary of Ewhurst. Rendering yet another Neighbourhood Plan useless.

So there you have it. Two homes built by Berkeley Homes just 20 years ago will be demolished to make way for  47 new homes can be built – 15 of which will be “affordable” on land at Firethorn Farm. Land owned by a former Ewhurst resident who has bu**ered off to live in the rural Hampshire countryside. Same resident who trousered millions after receiving planning permission on appeal for Larkfield.

Trees covered by Tree Preservation Orders will require removal, but then that’s not a problem is it?  As for the Neighbourhood Plan – here’s what the Inspector thinks of that little nuisance document that villagers have spent many months putting together!  

Screen Shot 2019-02-26 at 10.31.42.pngIn the meantime developers, Miller Homes are busy covering another part of Ewhurst in concrete, completely destroying the hedge along the entire length of the access road at Backward Point off the Cranleigh Road, Ewhurst. A hedge which has been destroyed by concrete sets laid down against the hedge which has completely destroyed the hedge’s its root system, and now leaves the nearby properties completely exposed.

Screen Shot 2019-02-26 at 10.37.24.png

Here is the decision. A decision that will rock the socks off Waverley Planners who may find themselves in trouble with the Government as they may once again find themselves not performing against the critical data as they continue to lose major appeals. 

PS. No objection from Protect Our Waverley or the Campaign for The Preservation of Rural England. The Surrey Hills AONB, which overlooks the site –  made the fact that it had no objection known to the Inspector.

Firethorn Farm Ewhurst – Appeal Decision

Have you wondered why the decision to close recycling centres and libraries have​ been deferred until October?​


To Dump or not to dump – that is the question?

Recycling Centres – v – Children’s Centres.





Has the Silly Season arrived early at the Sorry Advertiser this year?


We know the daffodils are sprouting and the sap is rising – but have the Cranleigh birds been singing just a little too loud and long to the local rag about the siting of Cranleigh’s new leisure centre? 

Whose cunning plan was that, WW wonders, to frighten the voting fodder witless?

We’re aware that Dunsfold Airfield may soon have oil-wells springing up along its runway (journalistic licence for gas exploration, in the Dunsfold environs!) but a £14m leisure centre too?

Somehow, we doubt it!

We haven’t asked the Flying Scotsman to confirm or deny the rumour – as we think he must still be miffed with us for publishing his off-line invite to the ungrateful Denise Wordsworth to join him for tea and biscuits, for he never responds to our emails … and he’s certainly never invited us round for tea!)

But in this particular instance, we think we can safely speak for him. Because if he had thousands of Cranleigh New town’s residents rocking up on his doorstep for a swim and a jog around the parkland, there ’d be hell-to-pay from the Provisional Wing of Protect Our Waverley. They may have gone preternaturally quiet since losing all their Judicial Reviews but that’s just made them even more determined to look for an opportunity to take the steam out of the Flying Scot’s funnel at finally bagging 1,800 – 2,300 homes. His sporran must over-floweth!

However, we understand there’s considerable angst amongst Waverley officers – our moles there are very reliable – because, thanks to Cranleigh Parish Council handing over a piece of parish land it once owned to a local charity for a private care home – the new leisure centre may have to stay exactly where it is! If it’s demolished the centre will be closed for a couple of years and clubs and members of the public will have, perforce, to take a dip in the lakes which the generous Mr Vrijland intends to build in the nearby Knowle Park as part of his ambition to

“give something back to the people of Cranleigh,”

all whilst trousering squillions from the sale of his former lettuce nursery to provide the people of Cranleigh with 265 homes and now he’s asking for more!! 

Screen Shot 2019-02-15 at 10.34.55.png



Have Councillors jeopordised saving Haslemere’s Georgian?



Owners of Haslemere’s Georgian Hotel have been left dismayed after their planning application was pulled from the Planning Committee at the last minute. Group Chief Executive Richard Angel told Haslemere Herald:

“Waverley officers publicly recommended the application for approval – the application was  withdrawn just 48 hours before the committee date. Nearly 12 months on from the initial submission, this delay is putting the future of the hotel and all 30 jobs at risk.”

It’s a controversial application to build 3 dwellings and change some of the rear hotel and spa into 16 flats, in order to revamp the tired hotel into a trendy boutique eatery and destination hotel, generating £2Million to secure its financial future. If this was Farnham or Godalming, it would be granted in a wink of an eye… but oh no, not in precious Haslemere!

The hotel is already in administration, and currently trading poorly in the hope of a refurbishment. Mr Angel continued“The hotel does not operate at full capacity. In January 2019, the occupancy rate dropped to just 9 per cent. At weekends, the figures are even worse.”

It seems Town and Waverley Councillors and the Haslemere Society in particular have been determined to try to prove the business was mismanaged and is perfectly viable as a 43 bedroom hotel, despite the applicant providing reports from Savills (1st March 2018) and Fleurets (15th August 2018). The Haslemere Society said: 

In a letter to Waverley last week the owners were dismayed at the meddling by local councillors:
we are shocked to hear that Members have raised the concerns they have given the clear and unambiguous evidence that has been provided.

The matters that you report as being raised by Members are without sound basis and clearly step outside the parameters of what is necessary and reasonable to request in the circumstances. Whilst we have taken the time to address them below, we must raise our significant concern that they have been raised both in the manner that they have and at this very late stage in the determination of the application.”

In particular the applicants highlighted in this letter The Haslemere Society’s Basil Fawlty pipe dreams:

  • In response to the question regarding the potential viability of the current 43-bed operation, we have submitted sufficient evidence to answer any such questions posed. This is the precise purpose of the Fleurets report and it answers the questions as to whether the current use is viable. As such, this request is considered to be preposterous and without merit and Members should be pointed to both the Fleurets report itself and the conclusions of the Councils’ independent audit of the report to ensure that they have properly recognised the detailed content of both reports.


Here we go, here we go, here we go Ooooh!


Screen Shot 2019-01-19 at 10.50.06



The fight to reduce the housing requirement for the whole of Waverley continues!  

So here goes another shedload of our council taxpayers’ money going down the proverbial legal eagle’s pan?

Out of the cupboard come all the Rollicking Rumpole’s wigs, as they measure their briefs by the metre in readiness for yet another High Court drama between the Campaign for The Preservation of Rural England,  Protect Our Waverley and ‘Your Waverley.’

Yesterday  CPRE/ POW were granted leave to appeal from the Court of Appeal against the judgment delivered in November concerning the housing requirement set in Waverley Borough Council’s Local Plan Part 1. That November judgement said that the housing requirement of 590 a year should be maintained, including 83 to cover Woking’s perceived “unmet need”.

So ‘YW’ may have to build 498 fewer homes and no doubt POW/CPRE hope that will rule out Phase 2 at Dunsfold, as it certainly won’t want to stop development on the countryside – will they?

The appeal centres on how a shortfall in housing provision – unmet need – in one borough is allocated to neighbouring boroughs. The clarification of this issue has implications not just for Waverley but for Guildford and across the country. The Right Honourable Lord Justice Singh said:

“I am persuaded by the Appellants skeleton arguments that there is a compelling reason why these two appeals should proceed, namely the general importance of the issues of principle raised.  It appears from those skeleton arguments that they have not been considered at the level of the Court of Appeal and it seems to me that they should be.”

This latest appeal comes against the background of two important changes. First, Woking Borough Council has declared that it now has no unmet need. Second, new demographic numbers recently released by the Office for National Statistics imply a much-reduced need for new housing.

Dunsfold resident Bob Lees said “This is great news! It provides Waverley Borough Council with a golden opportunity to significantly reduce the mandatory number of new houses to be built in the Borough over the next 14 years. POW fought against the housing requirement at the Examination of the Plan in the Council Chamber. POW fought again in the High Court. POW will fight in the Court of Appeal.

POW is fighting to protect our Waverley against unneeded development of our towns, of our villages and in our beautiful countryside.”

Well – if you believe that you will believe in fairies! Because this has nothing to do with protecting Waverley – it is all about preventing development on the largest brownfield site in the borough close to the home of Bob Lies, and his running-mate Little Britton who both spitting distance from  Dunsfold Park. A development which was .given the go-ahead by the High Court in November. POW is still smarting from this decision

Dunsfold Park is now preparing its Masterplan – which includes 1,800 homes. The First Phase of the total of 2,300 in the Waverley Local Plan.


Residents believe there is a whiff of brown envelopes wafting over Waverley.




Surely they all took a bung? “Oh no we didn’t.” Oh…


Local residents have been steaming and venting their spleens on Milford and Godalming Facebook groups over Waverley Councillors’ decision to grant planning for 200 houses on Milford Golf Course. After a three hour debate on Wednesday, the decision was made 10 for versus 5 against, with 3 abstentions.

Yes you heard it right – Three Councillors sat through THREE HOURS of debate and then still had the gall to abstain.*

How could they have done this? Gutless or what?
Why did they vote for this in the wake against such an avalanche of public outcry?

How did key local councillor Dennis Leigh keep Shtum after ranting vociferously against the development? What, we hear you cry? He abstained too?? This beggars belief! Had the Tory Whip – Councillor Michael Goodriddance been working overtime before the meeting?

No wonder local residents added 2 + 2 together and made 5, with many drawing the conclusion that Councillors were receiving big brown envelopes of cash. Surely there must be a reason for them to ignore the public so skilfully?!

As one resident after another came to the Bung Conclusion on Social Media, local top Tory Waverley and Surrey County Councillor Peter Martin  was forced to fire up his Facebook and defend his fellow councillors:

Screenshot 2019-02-21 at 20.38.17

Regrettably, we have to agree with him. The way Councillors approach these meetings is more cock-up than conspiracy and, although we make no excuses for them, are, as one said: “between a rock and a hard place.”  Otherwise, you would have to bung a lot of officers and councillors, and Statutory Agencies  – agencies that are completely overloaded with work, and half the time don’t even do their investigations properly. These things would certainly leak to our ears, wouldn’t they! We’d happily write an invoice too!

We heard one unguarded and frustrated SCC highway engineer say – SUDS – on developments (Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes) just don’t work! What an admission to make in public!

As one local resident pointed out – the damage was done as soon as the land was taken out of the Green Belt by Waverley’s Local Plan Part 1. The developer didn’t need to bung anybody after that – in fact, they might have got a £5Million CIL discount by getting it in before 1st March!

*We understand one councillor did arrive late so wasn’t permitted to vote as he hadn’t heard the full debate. He too spoke against. The Committee acts in a Quasi-Judicial style you see. Not that one particular Farnham Residents’ Councillor would agree. He regularly accuses Waverley of ignoring environmental law.  Which it appears, they can continue doing as long as Natural England and the Government says so. 

Last night Waverley Planners gave developers the go-ahead to build homes on Milford Golf Course.



Plus 3 Abstentions from the gutless ones.

We hate to say we told you so – but here’s yesterday’s post and here are the posts this little four-legged friend will soon be walking on!

Tonight The Milford Golf course development will be agreed on a wing and a prayer.

 A TORY TRICK – proposed by The TT’s whip Cllr Michael Goodridge who can  be relied upon to pull a rabbit out of the hat when the going gets rough. Proposed ‘A Planning Condition’ to approve the outline scheme for  200 homes in the hope, on a wing and a prayer, that the developer will reduce it to 180 later!

We should have put money on it at Bet Fred, but the odds were not good – because ‘Your Waverley” put the site in the Local Plan Part 1 – not the Government Inspector but ‘YW’ –  he just approved it! And last night consent was granted in outline- with an informative to developer Stretton Milford – that it is unlikely to get more than 180 homes on the golf course when it seeks detailed permission later.

Once upon a time,  everyone at Waverley thought it was THE  perfect site close to a station, schools, the A3, Milford village and nearby Godalming. In fact, local parish councils, hundreds of residents and most councillors didn’t actually like the scheme on Green Belt, on the flood plain, and believed it may not be deliverable as it is covered by a Covenant restricting its use.

But once again Betty’s nifty boot scored from the sidelines. Oh my – we will miss her.

For nearly three hours councillors, including the ward member, slammed the scheme. Most claimed there was insufficient information,  far too many unknowns including pavement improvements and bridge widening that were promised. Improvements that may not be in the developers’ gift, without the co-operation of Milford Golf Course!

But there was full support from Cranleigh Cllr Mary Foryszewski who, for the second time in just under a month, told her colleagues how much Cranleigh, with no station and very poor infrastructure, had repeatedly suffered from overdevelopment, and it was time for the rest of the borough take its share. 

In other words, you stuffed us and now it’s our turn to stuff you?

She went native after Waverley’s head planning honcho threatened the council’s  Planning Committee that if they refused the scheme towns like Farnham and Cranleigh, without the protection of Green Belt would suffer. As Waverley,  now requires a 20% buffer – and would not have a 5-year land supply, as had been proved recently in two overturned appeals!  Cllr Liz Townsend supported the scheme but called for, and highway officers agreed, too, bigger crossing points for walkers, Station Road should be wider and only 2-storey properties should be built.

Tim House, speaking on behalf of objectors lambasted the scheme calling it an “affront to common sense which flew in the face of public opinion.” He warned the land was covered by a restrictive Covenant that could prevent it ever being developed.”

He accused officers of coming up with a “cocktail of conditions” that the more realistic members of the committee should object to.

Witley Parish Council’s spokesman Cllr Gillian McCalden said the golf course was not the right place for development, and their Neighbourhood Plan had included far better locations for housing it recognised was badly needed. She predicted severe traffic congestion in Station Road, and although all the statutory consultees who had originally objected -Thames Water, SCC, Highways; Natural England; Environment Agency,  had now done a volte-face, and changed their minds, saying they were “now satisfied” –

However, she  Said: “we are not satisfied.”

The Ward Councillor Bob Upton said he didn’t blame Waverley planning officers:

“You are just doing your job and in the passage of time, you  will have moved on to pastures new as have most of your  colleagues, leaving behind many very frustrated villagers.”

Cllr Paul Follows said from the outset he would object to the application on the grounds that it was overdevelopment on a Flood Plain, off a narrow busy road, where no proper paths were provided to the station – unless, according to officers,  this could be negotiated sometime in the future! The Local Plan, which he said he had not voted for,  had stipulated 180 homes, and therefore 200 should be refused. Claiming the developer should be punished for its greed! 

Almost every councillor agreed that The boardwalk – of an unspecified height- necessary for villagers to reach a SANG in Flood Plain 3 – was inappropriate.

Councillor Jerry Hyman argued the scheme should be refused on the grounds that it ticked all the boxes as an EIA development and under the law required a proper Environmental Impact Assessment. as the site was above the required threshold.  

But as usual, politics came into play, he was slapped down again… but nobody could shut him up from warning that a time bomb could be ticking for the future of the environment and everyone should be considering the consequences of their actions would have on the borough’s endangered species.

Others said, the pavements were not wide enough and the extra traffic generated by the Dunsfold Development, Aarons Hill and others would exacerbate the situation at Milford Crossroads which was already at capacity.

Councillors questioned the County Highways’ predicted traffic flows and the size of the HGV’s from Tuesley Farm which regularly uses the narrow country lane.

Councillor Nick Holder called the scheme  – “a non-starter” and when the River Ock floods at it did in 2013- no traffic would move along the road- and where the SANG – which was- ” neither Special nor Alternative; nor Natural nor Greenspace – by any stretch of the imagination. “This scheme is complete nonsense, I won’t be voting for it.”

So there you have it folks,  once again the TORY JPC has caved in as they have on most major developments at the expense of the community – predominantly out of fear of appeal or planning inspectorate intervention due to appeals lost.

Full marks to Witley Parish Council which despite its objection, has wrung out of a developer a dumper truck full of money towards a host of improvements for Milford’s roads, schools, and community facilities. Some of which was squeezed out of it in the last few days!  

Perhaps if the former Chairman of Cranleigh Parish Council Mary Foryszewski had done the same – Cranleigh `New Town’ might not now be almost bereft of any improvements?

However, is that another Judicial Review we spy heading over Hascombe Hill? Because there are plenty of people out there in Milford with the will and the means to challenge this development. And based on some of the admissions made last night, there could be some very strong grounds to do so.



Tonight ​The Milford Golf course development will be agreed on a wing and a prayer.


 In readiness for her swan song performance the head planning honcho at Waverley Towers is already buffing up her boots and inserting new studs to kick another unpopular planning application through the goal posts.  Ok, ok, we know it’s a golf course.

The soon-to-be-replaced Betty Boot, who is shortly leaving to play for the Home team – will provide members of the Joint Planning Committee with a thousand reasons why they should support building on the former Green Belt golf course in Milford. Cover a  floodplain  with concrete and 200 homes – 80 of which will be “affordable.” For whom, they will actually be “affordable,” is anyone’s guess? 

You can read WW’s post on details of the scheme here:

Another slice of Waverley’s former Green Belt – about to bite the dust – as planners get set to change the face of Milford?


 In an up-date sheet added to a 109-page report to be presented to the committee – she says there are changes:

Page 75 – In regard to the test set out in Paragraph 55 of the Habitats regulations relating to the granting of a protected species licence.  To clarify, Natural England as the relevant licencing body will apply these tests when determining a licence application. As per relevant and established case law, it is not for Officers or members to carry out its own shadow assessment of this test when determining an application for planning permission.  Officers have made Natural England aware of the presence of protected species on this site and have been provided with a copy of Surrey Wildlife Trust’s response to this application. Natural England has not objected to this application and therefore it is considered reasonable for the Council to proceed on the basis that a licence is not unlikely to be granted if permission is approved. Perhaps she hasn’t read the latest Guardian Newspaper article – about which the Waverley Web has spoken to the journalist for confirmation.

PerhapsWaverley Planners should all read this?  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/29/agency-protecting-english-environment-reaches-crisis-point

Screen Shot 2019-02-19 at 18.05.02.png

Screen Shot 2019-02-19 at 18.04.41.pngWe will have a bet with you Bett.  Of course, Natural England isn’t going to object because thousands of environmentally important sites across England are coming under threat every day of the week as the government body charged with their care is struggling with understaffing, slashed budgets and increasing workload. 

Natural England has wide-ranging responsibilities protecting and monitoring sensitive sites, including sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) and nature reserves, and advising on the environmental impact of new homes and other developments in the planning stages. Its work includes overseeing national parks, paying farmers to protect biodiversity and areas of huge public concern such as air quality and marine plastic waste.

(Well we all know what is going on in Farnham over the air quality scandal.  One former member of staff has been charged and awaits trial, while her line manager has bug****D off to pastures new and a new plump salary!)

But while the activities of NE are being impaired by severe budget cuts and understaffing, Natural England employees and other interested parties have told the Guardian. “These are fantastically passionate staff who are worried that the environment is being affected so badly by these cuts,” one frontline staff member said.

“There will be no turning back the clock” if we allow sensitive sites to be degraded.

The agency’s budget has been cut by more than half in the past decade, from £242m in 2009-10 to £100m for 2017-18. Staff numbers have been slashed from 2,500 to an estimated 1,500.  But worry not Waverley residents – Waverley Planners are “always satisfied” with the comments made by statutory agencies, including Thames Water and the Environment Agency.

Just like the same Tory-led administration, officers and, some  members. were “perfectly satisfied” with Thakeham Homes scheme to build on a floodplain in Cranleigh. Homes that the Association of British Insurers following a recent meeting at the House of Commons with Ministers, is now considering advising its members – not to insure!! 

Perhaps ‘Your Waverley’ will put that up on its Searches Website for future buyers?



Here’s what one of our followers thinks:

As Harold Wilson didn’t say “a week is a long time in planning”

Last week Guildford was jubilant about the Inspector apparently restoring their Green Belt sites.

Yesterday the Government issued its response on using the 2016 ONS figures and entirely predictably rejected this idea ……..see https://andrewlainton.wordpress.com/ and various government pages. Make what you will of that.

Then as you say, tonight Waverley Borough Council Joint Planning Committee is racing to decide the fate of the application to build up to 200 houses on part of Milford Golf Course. Once again in Waverley, crucial flood risk assessments have been downgraded to matters to be dealt with AFTER planning is granted even though the Soggy SANG makes the FRA additionally complicated.

On top of that yesterday the Government also finally produced the local authority housing delivery figures ie the number of houses which have actually been built by Local Authority Area. That shows both Guilford and Waverley falling below the 95% mark which means (according to the revised National Planning Policy Framework issued last year) they now have to add a 20% buffer to their five year supply!!! No doubt officers will use that as justification tonight for bullying councillors into consenting to the GC site. That seems to me to be a remarkably stupid thing to do when everybody can see this application is highly likely to get mired in long legal wrangles over the restrictive covenant. That could mean delivery of these 200 houses will be held up for ? up to five years which will obviously have a knock on effect on delivery. But according to officers, the restrictive covenant isn’t a planning matter!

Words (nearly) fail me.

Another slice of Waverley’s former Green Belt – about to bite the dust – as planners ​get set to change​ the face of Milford?





Building on flood plains comes as second nature to ‘Your Waverley’ so it is no surprise that land opposite Milford Golf Course has been earmarked to go under concrete.

The 13.28 hectares of land once reserved for golfers and wildlife – and which served to soak up the Wealden clay groundwater – will,  if the planners have their way Tomorrow WEDNESDAY  – provide 200 new homes – 30% ” affordable.” Unless of course when the scheme reaches the detailed stage the affordable home figure is reduced  – or delayed which is happening elsewhere in the borough!  

 Waverley Planners are between a rock and a pile of concrete,  as a Government Inspector – dragged areas of the borough out of the Green Belt before approving the Daft Local Plan.  These included the villages of Elstead, Chiddingfold, Witley and the part of Milford Golf Course now under consideration. He argued there would be…

 “sufficient infrastructure contributions to mitigate the impact of the development.” He also said: “These contributions towards open space, education and improvements to the Downs Link are made to mitigate the effects of the development.”  So where is the contribution to the Downs Link we wonder? 

Was he thinking of the Community Infrastructure Levy Contribution or the 106 Legal Agreement Contribution? 

Because CIL – TO BE INTRODUCED ON MARCH 1 – would provide 7.5m compared with £1.5m  in 106 contributions – so if ‘YW’ wasn’t in such a rush to cover the borough in concrete Milford villagers would at least have trousered £7.5m the same amount of money as the owners of Milford Golf Course – filling at least a few holes in one!

A jubilant Guildford Borough Council has now had it’s precious Green Belt areas re-instated after the same Government Inspector said theirs must go too.

According to the 109-page report –  residents will be forced to use a Board Walk on stilts America style to be provided by the developers to reach the SANG – (Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace) with their dogs, not on leads but on doggy-stilts! This has to be provided on land in Flood Zone 3 because as it says on the tin – it floods!  These mitigation measures are required on a site within 5km of a SPA – Special Protection Area so you can be sure Cllr Hyman won’t be voting for this one?

Perhaps the homes will be on stilts too – on Flood Plains 1 and, 2. With the green space on Zone 3 and leisure facilities provided in Godalming…more traffic?

But one sentence you will hear repeated over and over again by officers when Stretton Milford Ltd’s scheme is considered by the Joint Planning Committee. The Development will cause…Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 11.27.18.png and:

Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 11.23.13 it’s ok to put the SANG in a swamp!

Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 11.26.49.png

 Hundreds of objections have poured into Waverley Towers hallowed portals – on everything from the effects on the environment; air quality; traffic congestion; light pollution; flood risk; and the impact on school places – where 1st and middle schools GP surgeries; Dentists and hospital services; are already oversubscribed. 

Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 10.53.37.png

So why is Waverley in such a rush – because it admits it has a 5.8-year land supply?  Is it because two recent planning appeals in Farnham have been overturned by the Government because housing supply targets are not being met and Inspectors beg to differ on the land supply?   Developers are slowing down their housebuilding programmes because they can’t sell the homes fast enough.

Is it now a case of …PLANNING BY FEAR? WHICH IS DEVELOPER & GOVERNMENT LED?   So lets all bin the ballot box and give local democracy a decent burial.

Because Waverley will have reached its 11,000 home quota – before 2022 – not 2032 – with some towns and villages reaching their allotted quota already. 

However, you can be assured……. Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 11.23.13

Development should be allowed because of its access to infrastructure – including Milford Railway Station. However, residents claim, the trains have reached the maximum capacity of 12 carriages and the car park cannot cope now, let alone in future,  with cars spewing into Station Road.  And here’s a few more objections on a site which is covered by a Legal Covenant held by a local Solicitor who lives adjacent to the site. A legal matter which could hold up development further?

Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 10.55.29.png 

What are the pluses: 200 new homes to satisfy the needs of Woking people – 80 of which will be “affordable,”

The price? By destroying  the rural character to the south of Milford?


Council tax going up and up!


Not, however, what you would have heard if you were listening to Waverley’s Budget Meeting last week – as the Tory administration told the world and his wife and children that the borough was safe in its hands. It claimed it had not increased council tax very often during its stewardship.

White man once again speaks with forked tongue?

Roll up – Roll up for ‘Your Waverley’s Annual Budget Show.

Since 1997 council tax in England as a whole has increased by 57% in real terms. You will see from the map below Waverley Borough Council’s council tax has increased by 88.90%. This information has been collected by the Taxpayers’ Alliance and not by us.

Screen Shot 2019-02-03 at 18.46.51.png

Screen Shot 2019-02-02 at 09.30.31.png

This includes payouts to the staff at Waverley and Surrey County Councils.


Screen Shot 2019-02-03 at 18.47.25.png

Screen Shot 2019-02-03 at 18.48.18.png

Screen Shot 2019-02-03 at 18.49.03.pngScreen Shot 2019-02-03 at 18.49.54.png

Is Dunsfold Village’s very own Drill or Drop – on its​​ way?


Screen Shot 2019-02-17 at 10.43.00.png

UK Oil & Gas plc has given details of a proposed new well site in Surrey.

The company, which is the major investor at the Horse Hill oil site in Surrey, says it is preparing to apply for planning permission for exploration at Dunsfold, home of the famous airfield and Top Gear track.

Both of which have been the subject of numerous posts on this site – in the past, present and no doubt in the future. We at the Waverley Web cannot help wondering if the Protect Our Waverley (POW) gang will be up for yet another fight? 

In a letter to residents, living in the village 8 miles south of Guildford UKOG said it wanted to drill and test a hydrocarbon well, to be called Dunsfold-1. If the well were successful, UKOG said it would drill and test a sidetrack, Dunsfold-1Z.

Villagers have been invited to drop into the Dunsfold Village Hall on Wednesday between 3pm and 7pm to hear the news – and ask questions.

Investigations by the Waverley ‘Web have revealed that exploration for gas occurred in nearby Alfold in the 1990s.

The application will be considered By Surrey County Council.


Screen Shot 2019-02-17 at 10.43.10.png

190215 UKOG Dunsfold plans

Spanish nurses heading home?


Screen Shot 2018-03-05 at 16.54.34

A bitter pill we may have to swallow? 

NHS trusts are at greater risk of losing Spanish nursing staff over other nationalities under a no-deal Brexit, due to a little-known regulatory problem.


At the moment, Spanish nationals can accrue points from their work in Britain that can later be used on Spain’s public health job exchange. But, under a no-deal Brexit, NHS experience will no longer be recognised in Spain.

HSJ understands concerns are growing that Spanish staff are considering returning to their home country, as too long a stay in the UK could jeopardise their job prospects in Spain.

As of June 2018, the latest date at which data was broken down by nationality, Spanish nurses and health visitors make up 17 per cent (3,370) of the EU NHS nurse workforce in June 2018 – the second highest volume of staff from the EU after Ireland.

NHS Employers confirmed that information has been sent to nurses from the Spanish regulator to confirm that Brexit may have “an impact on their continued registration with the Spanish regulator”.

Joan Pons Lapala, a Spanish nurse who came to work in the UK in 2000 and now a clinical fellow at NHS Digital, said  “Potentially we will have a catastrophe here, as potentially no more Spanish nurses [will] come here and the Spanish nurses already here will leave as we will no longer be able to gain points [to use to secure a job back home].

“It’s not a priority to the UK government but it should be as Spain is a main source of nurses and the issue is being overlooked completely. It is a ticking bomb – it is going to happen.”

Mr Pons Lapala added many of his Spanish colleagues had already left the UK to work in Ireland, which he said is now the “number one choice for Spaniards when it used to be England”.

NHS Employers chief executive Danny Mortimer said: “What we clearly need is certainty for our staff and clarity from regulators and professional bodies – and quickly. The future relationship with the EU will need to set out clearly how professional experience gained in the UK might be recognised by EU member states, and vice versa.”

According to board papers published by Bolton Clinical Commissioning Group, its main acute provider Bolton Foundation Trust may lose its Spanish nursing theatre staff because of the regulatory problem.

The papers said: “Spanish nursing regulators have indicated that they will no longer recognise UK nursing experience for Spanish nationals post-Brexit… and this has meant some of our Spanish nurses in theatres have indicated that they are looking to return to Spain this year.”

The board papers said the trust was already advertising the four posts in anticipation of the staff leaving and are in discussion with a further five nurses.

David Hubert, the secretariat of the EU Network of Nurse Regulators, said: “Spain only recognises professional experience for nurses who practice in the EU. As things stand, if/when the UK leaves the European Union it will become a non-EU country and professional experience obtained in the UK henceforth will not be recognised anymore”.

The issue would be delayed if a transition period is secured but any final deal with the EU would need an agreement between the UK’s and Spain’s regulators to continue to allow the system to operate as it currently does.

A House of Commons briefing paper from October 2018 said the overall number of Spanish EU staff working in the NHS had fallen by 15 per cent between June 2016 and June 2018, which was a sharper fall than other nationalities.

The Department of Health and Social Care said: “In the event of a no-deal exit from the EU, we will seek to put in place arrangements to ensure that nursing qualifications and experience gained within the NHS are recognised in EU member states in the same way that they are in other countries”.

The government was also recently criticised for its new immigration scheme. People from the EU who wish to spend more than three years in the UK will now need to make an “application under the new skills-based future immigration system, which will begin from 2021”.

NHS Providers said the proposals “only add to the uncertainty faced by trusts as they look to recruit and retain the EU staff they need”.

With me,​ it’s all​ or nothing – The Bursar of Cranleigh School warns villagers.


Cranleigh Planners – we use the words with a degree of scepticism – as nobody at ‘Your Waverley takes a  jot of notice what the grass-roots of democracy has to say.  Cranleigh Parish Council has objected to 44 homes being built on a vital wedge of countryside separating the settlement of Rowly from Cranleigh. Land that Waverley asked a Government Inspector to include in the Green Belt.

The Bursar of Cranleigh School told Cranleigh Parish Council’s planning committee, in no uncertain terms – that if the school didn’t get the houses – then it won’t be building new sports facilities.

How about that for a threat?

You can’t have one without the other… so the song goes… 

Needless to say, village leaders voted to support the sports facilities off Horseshoe Lane – but not homes across a vital wedge of the countryside. Land that could open the floodgates to further development along Guildford Road, bringing the settlement of Rowly into Cranleigh New Town. Well, you can be sure Cranleigh School will get at least one vote – Councillor Stewart Stennett – who thanks to his Waverley mates – and against officers’ advice,  has already bagged development in the Green Belt on his own land in Guildford Rd.

Residents’ whose homes surround the new paying facilities are objecting to having floodlit fields and running tracks near their homes.

Our followers over there in the East – tell us, the unctuous Martin Bamford “BB” as he is known locally, has gone out of his way to support the building of these homes –  he is after all the local spokesman for everything concerned with expanding Cranleigh in every direction and controlling the Cranleigh Community Board – from which we and many others have been banned.

The seemingly cash-strapped school -(which boasts fees of around £15/20,000 per term) is joining its equally cash-strapped neighbouring centre of excellence at Godalming’s Charterhouse in joining the property game. Well – everyone else is at it- so why not us the say?

Cranleigh School is in line for a contribution to its new sports facilities from section 106 monies provided by Berkeley Homes. Villagers consider that, if they are going to any local schools, perhaps they should be going to public sports facilities and not to those who educate a mere 7% of British children! Ah! but they do say these are community facilities don’t they – the local hoy poly can rent them, as they do if they want to rent the school’s existing facilities. at a price – and when of course its students have no need of them?

It strikes us, reading  Batty’s paean of praise for Cranleigh School‘a registered charity who are not in this for profit, instead of reinvesting monies into facilities … An asset rich, cash poor charity … Our local schools will benefit greatly from access to a new running track and 4G football pitch, with suitably equipped playing field space …

Not to mention his eulogy to his A2 Dominion pal, Andy Cranleafy, ‘the selected developer, A2D, is not only offering 35% affordable housing but is itself an organisation which reinvests its profits into building affordable housing and managing its existing portfolio …’

Isn’t BB  seriously over-egging his pudding? Put a sock in it do. Everyone in the East knows which side your bread pudding’s buttered and, frankly, we’d all prefer it if you sat down and shut up so we don’t have to keep putting up!

Mind you, if the Dunsfold Developer is reading this, maybe he might consider offering BB  a job as his new local PR … because he and his family speak up for anything and everything connected with – Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust; Cranleigh Chamber of Trade; Cranleigh in Bloom; Knowle `Park Initiative; Rowly Centre;  and the Cranleigh Community Board – which now has a rival because he censors contributions and if he doesn’t like them  – he spikes them!! The new board is Called the Cranleigh Community Group – which is championing opening the old Cranleigh Village Day Hospital and Minor Injuries Unit. Rather than a new multi-million-pound PRIVATE nursing home!

Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 13.53.54.png

Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 13.56.08.png

Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 13.59.26.pngScreen Shot 2019-01-24 at 13.57.44.png

Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 13.56.46.png


Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 14.01.08.png

Now here’s an interesting objection from a former Cranleigh School employee – hope his pension’s safe!

Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 14.09.23.png

Another little missive.

Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 14.02.11.png

Please, Sir – we want more?


Out goes the begging bowl – again… Seems to be the order of the day for the borough’s ever-increasing band of wannabe developers. If at first, you succeed – ask for more?

You may recall that the former Westbrook Mills Offices on Borough Rd, Godalming were once in the sighScreen Shot 2019-01-22 at 13.27.43ts of ‘Your Waverley.’ It once had designs on the building in its efforts to either downsize or perhaps join the development game who knows?

Fancy having the first exclusive view of ‘Your Waverley’s’ proposed new offices in Godalming?

However, it was pipped at the post. The new owners bagged the office building, was given permission for 64 flats then 99 flats and now wants to go up in the world by adding another storey and an extra 24 flats, including seven affordable units – (123). Keep going chaps – maybe next time you can make it up to 150 to keep your heads above water in Flood Zone 3. Let’s hope the occupants can too?

But after Waverley’s central planning committee saw what was intended for the site – they likened the design too – ‘ A 1950’s Russian Hospital; and Wandsworth Prison, which would neither do justice to the site near the Lammas lands or to the town of Godalming.

Cllr Stephan Reynolds called in the application to the Central committee to prevent officers granting consent under their delegated powers. Claiming the Government planning rules which now allowed offices to be converted into residential properties was a retrograde one. “In Godalming, we have now lost a lot of good usable office space, which we cannot do anything about” He described the flat roofs of some of the flats as “horrible, an attempt by the developer to make more money.” Others claimed the officers’ recommendation to approve the scheme was contradicted by much of what they had said in their report – about the bulk, height and massing of such a large and prominent building. Cllr Paul Follows wasn’t impressed: He had concerns over flooding and SANGS and said some flats didn’t meet the national minimum space standards. “I happen to live in one of these sort of conversions and it possibly one of the worst places I have ever had to rent.” Not everyone agreed with him. Cllr Anna James said if people wanted to live in little flats it was up to them – but I don’t like the flats roofs – Wandsworth `prison is more attractive.

AfterScreen Shot 2019-02-13 at 19.41.36.png almost every member of the committee had panned the development for 20 minutes – it was unanimously refused.



GodalmingWestbrookMillsItem B1 WA20181524 – Westbrook Mwestbrookmillsfloodills Borough Road Godalming GU7 2AZ

Roll up – Roll up for ‘Your Waverley’s Annual Budget Show.



There was rapturous applause for speakers, and so many pats on the back, you could be forgiven for thinking we weren’t watching Waverley’s Full Council Annual Budget meeting, but the finals of  Strictly Come Dancing!

Perish the thought that the Tory-controlled council would engage in what one councillor described as “cheap election gimmicks” to pass a balanced budget, which preserves community grants; doesn’t increase car parking charges; builds affordable homes; makes efficiencies, and possibly sweeps Godalming High Street clean every morning before 5 a.m? Not forgetting the new Blightwells Yard development that will bring unbelievable riches and prosperity into Farnham.  With lots of new shops and restaurants.

So that’s the good news. What about the bad? Well, council tax will increase year on year from now to the maximum allowed by the Government. Fees and charges are increased, everything from dancing to dying, and if you need anything from the planning department get your wallet out or butt out!!  

Surely that warranted yet another round of applause?

Waverleys very own Umming bird puffed out her ample chest and reminded us all just how fantastic the Tories were handling our borough, and it was only safe in their hands – just in case any of those perishing little upstarts like Farnham Residents or the solitary Liberal Democrat and Independent get any ideas of something different.

Sadly in one sentence, we counted 15 – yes 15 Umms – from Leader The Potty One – but never mind, for a minute there we seriously thought she was going to get a full row of sixes and a standing ovation. 

But then one little upstart – Cllr Paul Follows  piped up saying: 
”I always enjoy a full council. So many councillors I absolutely never see at anything else. Always nice to see what a genuinely ‘representative’ bunch we all are when we are together like this when the decisions we take impact so many…..

Cheeky or what- don’t you know Cllr PF – that they don’t have to rock up like you – because they are Tories and there are lots of them –   Fifty to your Seven! But they are afraid of your popularity – and its beginning to show.

He raced through his 4 minutes believing he would be cut off in his prime saying –

“Like all councils, we face extreme pressure from government austerity policies and also from the near financial implosion of Surrey County Council – itself an exemplar of failure and mismanagement and a body that will almost certainly continue to push services down the locally government food chain without much of its funding – all the while calling it ‘Partnership’. Shocks we are ill prepared for.

The leader of the council mentioned caring Conservatives? We must have cornered the market on that scarce commodity nationwide then. We’ve seen in Waverley, as elsewhere. – an explosion in the use of food banks,  use of the voluntary sector, in the need for debt management services, in poverty and in homelessness. One wonders how many members here have had to make use of these services or be in that position. And how a tax rise might feel to them if they were. It’s not the tax rise I have a problem with (though to me its need is not sufficiently justified). It’s the context that it sits in.

“Officers have done a fantastic job in trying to paper over the cracks – or more accurately the impending fissures – and for one more year prop up the shop.”

A tax rise to keep things just about as they are. Probably the last time they are able to do this – as the medium-term outlook beyond this year looks extremely bleak. As to electoral gimmicks – one might almost imagine that their current political masters have an election to fight this year and are banking on residents not looking beyond this decision and this year.

The portfolio holder has laid the groundwork for that likely future in his speech – and I do not believe services can be maintained without significant changes locally and nationally. I have little confidence in the income streams generating what is forecast. Opposition councillors Cllr McLeod and Cllr. Beaman have highlighted some examples of this.

Breathless as he waited for Farnham’s Gal to bring down the gavel – he thanked officers Graeme Clark and Peter Vickers for discussing the budget in depth and answering his questions.  Thanked  Cllr Beaman for his chairmanship of the recent scrutiny committee that allowed a serious and civilised opportunity for members to discuss the budget in depth. It was at this session that many of my questions were answered but concerns regarding investment forecasts fees and charges remain.

“It was also a shame that only around 25 of 57 councillors attended that meeting – of which I was one of only two of the 10 councillors representing Godalming wards that attended.” 

Ditto the comment we made earlier Cllr Follows – silly boy! He continued to push his luck by asking questions – to which he received no answers. No change there then!

If I may put to the leader the following questions

Last year I asked the leader to demonstrate how you have engaged with your party at Surrey and more importantly in Parliament to challenge their approach? I ask you that again now. As many of you will again stand under its banner in May one assumes you otherwise agree with their austerity and local government policies?

I would also ask you to explain how, with considerable extra weight and reliance put upon our voluntary sector, also largely as a consequence of Conservative policy, you believe they will cope with making do and eventually with not enough?

How will towns such as Godalming benefit from CIL if they have already met their local plan targets? If they will benefit, how will you achieve that without essentially depriving other areas to do so?

And finally, I ask you to confirm the laughable figure of £34k for Brexit preparation and what it will be used for?

To conclude – For the lack of clarity on fees and charges, my concerns re forecasting and frankly due to impending national and Surrey related-issues that will almost certainly scupper this budget – it is my intent not to support this budget- it is premature and too vulnerable to events..”

At which point Fireman Sam Pritchard pulled out his hose and poured it all over Cllr Follows’ Fireworks.

A tad rich considering his attendance record and the fact his ward’s residents call on Cllr Follows for help.


Will ‘Your Waverley’ follow – Follows and answer his questions?


Probably not – so we will answer for them because it’s quite simple really.


Now the towns and villages right across the borough are reaping the rewards of this failed administration as HGV’s pound along their country roads delivering materials onto green fields to build homes most local people cannot afford. It couldn’t produce a Local Plan – which presently resides with the High Court -awaiting a decision on a challenge – and LP Part 2 which has been postponed – for electoral purposes. Mainly because it proposes too many unpopular sites for development in Haslemere.


CIL  replaces the former 106 legal agreements for securing money for improved infrastructure. 


If developers had waited and paid up it may have gone some way towards compensating for the loss of trees, hedgerows, watercourses, wildlife,  open countryside, floodplains and agricultural land from being sacrificed on their alters. But, why would they do that when they are racing towards the finish-line to trouser profits!

At the Full Council meeting, tomorrow Godalming Councillor Paul Follows is demanding answers to the questions laid out below:


Screen Shot 2019-02-11 at 21.25.40.png