Changing the name – so what’s the game?


Dinah Washington’s What a difference a day makes:

What a difference a change could make
Just five little letters
It might bring back the sun and the favour
Where there used to be rain
Our yesterday was blue, dear villagers, without you
Today we’re a part of you,
Our lonely days are through, dear villagers
Soon you might just be ours
Lord, what a difference a name makes
There’s now a rainbow before us
Skies above can’t be stormy
Since that moment of bliss
That thrilling idea
It’s heaven when you
Find a trick up your sleeve
What a difference a name change might make
All the difference to us!

Changing the name – so what’s the game?

As they say in a marriage – ‘Change the name but not the letters – you change for worse and not for better.”

After 20 years has the Cranleigh Charity, Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust (CVHT), given up or is it proposing to battle on regardless of public opinion? The residents, including many donors, have written to the Waverley Web saying they are completely baffled.

They are asking:

WHY has CVHT announced – just days after its planning application for a Care Home + community beds was refused – a name change?  Do they seriously think it’s going to be a game-changer?  If so, they’re doomed to disappointment!


Do the Trustees – like Jeremy Corbyn & John McDonnell – think that local residents are daft?  Do they really think they can continue to bamboozle them?  If so they are living in a bubble bigger than the Westminster bubble that failed to predict the recent political earthquake!

 Apparently, the Trustees have also changed their charitable objectives, according to the Charities’ Commission website:

Screen Shot 2019-12-14 at 21.20.11

We very much doubt the people of Cranleigh and the Eastern Villages care about the so-called charity’s objectives any longer simply because they know it’s no longer a charity but a private enterprise.  

What they do care about is the fact that they’ve been robbed!  And in broad daylight!  
Until the Trustees of CVHT fess-up, admit to their chicanery and offer to reimburse those who supported their original objective – a NEW COTTAGE HOSPITAL – not a PRIVATELY OWNED NURSING HOME the Villagers – v – Trustees divide will continue.  
Rather like Momentum, the Trustees have built themselves an echo chamber and moved into it.  But what they need to remember is that there are more villagers than them and that doesn’t bode well for their welcome should they ever succeed in getting their miserable, tainted project off the ground.  Do the residents of Cranleigh and the Eastern Villages want this self-serving project to succeed in the teeth of local opposition?  The answer is short and to the point: NO!  Perhaps there should be a vote on it … just saying


Here are the original Objects…

Screen Shot 2019-12-14 at 21.18.00.png

Here are the new Objects, if you can Adam and Eve it, published on the Charity’s website. Note: In the area of the Primary Care Group.  A group soon to become Surrey Heartlands Trust. Also note the new Charitable Objects cater for anyone and everyone, for anything and everything,  – just so long as it can hang onto the land and the public’s money?

Screen Shot 2019-12-14 at 21.18.43.png

No wonder Cranleigh Parish Council, which handed over the proposed site in a land-swap, has set aside £3,000 of its limited funds to seek legal advice?

Power to the people of the eastern villages as they joined Waverley Planners to give a controversial Care Home development the order of the boot.

6 thoughts on “Changing the name – so what’s the game?”

  1. When the original dream of getting a new hospital was announced in 2001 and the charity was formed, absolutely no mention was made of the affiliated health aspects, particularly a care home – we already had very good elderly care homes in the area, including our Longfield Home for the Elderly run by the local authority. I wonder, did this extra detail get added to the original description after it was announced this facility was to close. Remember it was only built in the 1970s.
    There was virtually no social media when this project was conceived so we were all completely oblivious of any other “health needs” being added to the original description.
    The planning application for what was planned on this particular site was turned down for various reasons and I cannot see, by changing a name, is sufficient reason for this application to be approved.
    This whole debacle is getting more and more suspicious and should be halted immediately.

  2. Isn’t it strange that a Godalming councillor comes to the aid of the residents of Cranleigh & the eastern villages?

    A councillor that has more than enough to do running the town and borough councils.

    Will others emulate this new style of councillor – concerning themselves with borough-wide issues? Are we watching a new type of Waverley taking shape? If so, three cheers.

  3. I completely agree with Margaret. Do you think Cranleigh and Guildford’s newly elected MP would be willing to help too?

  4. Perhaps someone should ask the newly elected Guildford and Cranleigh MP where she stands on this issue?

    We understand from the Cranleigh parish council minutes of which she was a member, that she Abstained. In other words she sat upon the fence, because she knew there was an election in the offing and she didn’t want to offend anyone. Politicians like this make us sick.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.