SIMPLES! The Cranleigh Village Health Trust!
The charity formed to build a replacement HOSPITAL for the eastern villages – with publicly fund-raised money – skulks away – to find yet another cunning plan to build on formerly owned public land it bought for £1. Meanwhile, key stakeholders are dropping off its list faster than the fall of Autumn leaves.
On Thursday evening Cranleigh’s village leaders were the latest and the last of a long-line to ditch the plans for a 64-bed private care home for anyone from anywhere, and an accommodation block – for health workers from the outer boondocks.
Cranleigh Parish Council has been licking the wounds inflicted on it by its predecessor’s crass decision-making. The cash-strapped council has sought legal advice on how it can get its land back and is continuing to do so, though it went behind closed doors to consider its next legal steps.
In a brilliant slide presentation by Council Clerk Beverley Bell on Zoom she spelt out the complex history advising councillors of the present state of play on both the current planning application and appeal against a previous refusal. Although the Charity – Cranleigh Village Health Trust (CVHT) states the schemes are halted, which has brought letters of objection to a halt…
This is not the case – both are going ahead – and the latest scheme could be heard in November and the appeal in January.
Andy Webb, the leader of the Campaign Group opposing the 20-year HOSPITAL saga, which has morphed into something unrecognisable to the donors who raised £1.8m, asked a string of questions. He was joined by former nurse Cathy Gould who has headed up the team’s efforts to seek a Charity Commissioner investigation! Although they represent many thousands of residents and donors in the eastern villages – the charity refuses to respond. They now want round-table talks with Cranleigh Parish Council and the Trust?
Chairman Liz Townsend recognised their concerns and promised that the council would do its utmost to answer their questions during the meeting that followed. However, matters of a legal nature concerning the Covenant on the Paddock Field (the proposed development site) would be discussed in private, so as not to prejudice its position.
The Clerk presented a series of slides revealing some of the answers:
- There was no longer support for the scheme from the Integrated Care Partnership! Royal Surrey; SCC; Surrey Heartlands Trust and the Care Commissioning Group! * slide 1
- There is no support from Surrey County Council! * slide 2
CVHT confirmed on 19th September: That the residential accommodation block will have no commercial or legal link with either HC-ONE or the 64-bed-care home! CONFUSED?
And there were we just a few short weeks ago told by the Chairman of The Trust Robin Fawkner-Corbett that it had no signed-up provider for the care home either? Does white man speak with forked tongue?
So there you have it, folks. During the hour debate and votes that followed – Cranleigh Parish Council decided it WILL NOT support the building of a residential accommodation block or a private nursing home on land it sold for £1 in return for a playing field. It would also provide the Government Inspector with all the latest updates from the Integrated Care Partnership and Surrey County Council which revealed there was NO support for the scheme.
It reiterated its call to the charity to discuss the return of the land-based on an Agreement made between them * Slide 3.
The Charity might just as well have said: Stuff you! Slide *4
To sum up: there is now NO SUPPORT from any of the key stakeholders in the toxic project that has split Cranleigh asunder from:
Cranleigh Parish Council; Waverley Borough Council; Surrey County Council Adult Social Care; The Surrey Heartlands CCG; The Integrated Care Partnership – which includes The Royal Surrey County Hospital; Cranleigh League of Friends; The Cranleigh GP Practice; or The GP Federation; mental health; Community CCG’s; voluntary sector organisations; and… last but not least the thousands of people who signed Andy Webb’s Cranleigh Community Board petition and the many hundreds of people who have objected to the latest planning application.
What more does the charity need to halt this divisive and unpopular scheme which has divided the village?
OUR ADVICE. When you are in a hole – stop digging!
However, it is not completely ‘Billy No Mates.’ Abstentions came from three parish councillors. These included Hannah Nicholson of the defunct Cranleigh Community Board and now Cranleigh Conversations; Rosemary Burbridge of the “I need a care home for my husband;” and George Worthington who abstains from anything to do with the project leaving residents’ to wonder WHY WHEN he never declares an interest?
Surely there must be some amongst those trustees that are now actually questioning the viability of this debacle and want to now call a halt…………. or is there is too much of a financial benefit to them – what is up their sleeves that they’re keeping schtum about. By pressing on, as it has now been plainly acknowledged by all stakeholders that there is none for the actual community, this must question their motives.
By gaining planning permission for that particular parcel of land, would it open a gateway to more lucrative future development plans I.e.Dunsfold?
Margi if they get the planning, they do not have to build the nursing home first, they can build the accommodation, then put forward that it is not viable to build the nursing home and then put in planning for more housing, task completed.
We can’t help wondering why this Trust continues to battle on against all the odds? We continue to ask the same question. Where is the community benefit to the good people of Cranleigh and the surrounding villages?
As for opening a gateway to more lucrative future development in Dunsfold. If you mean Dunsfold Park, we doubt the Flying Scotsman would want to be tainted by a scheme he long-ago lost sight of and that he once supported. Wasn’t;t he one of the biggest sponsors? Didn’t he ask for his money to be returned?