I am writing to inform Reform UK supporters and potential
supporters in our constituency of Godalming and Ash about the background to the
May 7th elections for the new West Surrey unitary authority.
If you are not already a Reform UK member or supporter, I
say to you, welcome. If you feel you want to join or to donate to Reform UK,
you can do so via our donations page here: https://donate.reformparty.uk/godalming-ash.
Management Summary
On May 7th, you will be able to vote for
councillors to form a new local council called West Surrey Unitary Authority.
Who gets elected will have repercussions. On your local services, your roads,
your freedom to drive, your green spaces and your council tax bill.
Context
·
West Surrey is a newly created council.
·
The councillors you elect on May 7th
will not take on their powers until April 2027.
·
Until then, the current councillors will
continue to run Surrey County Council (SCC) and the borough councils.
·
West Surrey will begin life with a huge debt,
estimated at around £8,000 per elector.
·
The number of councillors in Surrey will be
reduced from more than 450 in SCC and the boroughs to just 162. Of these, 90
will be from West Surrey.
The facts
The Tories, since 2021, have managed Surrey County Council
in a way that does not represent the interests of people in the more rural
parts of Surrey. Particularly in transport policy, where they have been
consistently hostile to drivers of private cars and vans.
Without a very significant Reform UK presence in the new
West Surrey unitary authority, the erosion of the freedoms of the people of
Surrey will inevitably continue.
The vision that Tories, Labour, Lib Dems and Greens all have
for Surrey’s future is a “woke” and green one. They see “environmental
responsibilities” and “equality, diversity and inclusion” as more important
than serving the people of Surrey.
The local government changes, that have brought West Surrey
into existence, are touted as devolution, but they are not. Labour are seeking
to centralize power into mega-councils. And the Tories have eagerly co-operated
with the Labour plans.
The huge debt that West Surrey will inherit is the result of
Tory councils, particularly in Woking, making unwise investments. It is unjust
that people in Waverley and Guildford should be expected to pay off other
councils’ debts.
There is a longer-term plan for a “Mayor of Surrey,” with
wide and sweeping powers. This is likely to result, as it has in London, in
top-down control and zero concern for the needs and desires of local residents.
House building targets have been set, which amount to an
increase in the population of more than 50% in Waverley borough and 30% in
Guildford borough over the 20 years to 2043.
All this is likely to lead to:
·
Less local representation.
·
Increasing pressure on roads and council
services.
·
Increasing pressure to build on green belt land,
and to sell off green spaces for building.
·
Ongoing council tax increases.
Why vote Reform UK?
Reform UK will be prudent and responsible with how we use
your money. Reform-run councils have already saved £325 million in council
spending in 2025/6.
Reform UK are the only party who are against net zero, and
against anti-car policies such as blanket 20mph speed limits, chicanes and
speed bumps (many of them broken). Reform will stand up for the rights of safe
drivers to get around West Surrey unimpeded.
We have so many road works and road closures at the moment,
that it’s often really difficult to get from A to B. Reform UK will push for highway
contractors to co-ordinate and expedite their works better.
Our streets are riddled with potholes, that keep on coming
back because repairs are done on the cheap. Reform UK will demand higher
standards, and push for getting the job done right the first time.
Labour, like the Tories before them, want to cram more and
more people into our part of Surrey. Reform UK will push back against
unrealistic house-building targets.
If you care about the people of Surrey rather than about
woke and green policies, Reform UK is your only voting option on May 7th.
Even if – particularly if – you have never voted in a local election before, or
the last time you did was many years ago.
Woking, Spelthorne and Runnymede
Since around 2015, there has been increasing pressure on
local authorities’ finances, at both county and borough levels. And there is,
rightly, a limit to how fast they can raise council tax. This led a number of
councils to take financial risks in an effort to cover the deficits.
One of these was Woking Borough Council. It was Tory
controlled for almost all of the period 2007 to 2019. The Tories lost control
to the Lib Dems at the 2022 elections, and it was not long before the problem
of Woking’s debt became public knowledge. The debt, of more than £18,000 per
resident, came about because the Tories had used borrowed money to make unwise
investments in large-scale building projects.
By 2024, Woking had a debt of about £2 billion. Spelthorne had
£1 billion, and there was £2.5 billion of total debt at the other councils,
including Surrey County Council. Woking and Spelthorne had the two highest
council debts in the whole country, and Runnymede was fifth.
Surrey County Council’s ambitious plans
All this took place at the same time as Tory-controlled
Surrey County Council (SCC) reached peak green mania. In the name of Boris
Johnson’s pursuit of net zero and other projects, that the Tories thought were
“strategic.”
They wanted a Surrey where “Everyone lives healthy, active
and fulfilling lives, and makes good choices about their wellbeing.” Where
“Residents live in clean, safe and green communities, where people and
organisations embrace their environmental responsibilities.” With “No one left
behind.” “Equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI).” “Growing a sustainable
economy. Tackling health inequality. Enabling a greener future. Empowering
communities.” They even went so far as to join UK100, “a network of local
leaders who have pledged to lead a rapid transition to Net Zero with Clean Air
in their communities ahead of the government’s legal target.”
Well, I don’t know about you, but myself, I am opposed to
just about everything there. That’s a big reason I support Reform UK. The party
is pledged to scrapping net zero. And I agree. Not just because we can’t afford
it, but because CO2 doesn’t cause any real problems, so net zero wouldn’t
bring any benefits at all!
Reform is also against the ban on new petrol and diesel
cars. And against anti-car policies more generally, such as ULEZ style schemes,
low traffic neighbourhoods and blanket 20mph speed limits. As a safe driver of 55
years’ standing, who knows, without any doubt, that the health risks from air
pollution are grossly overstated, I too am against all these things.
As to “equality, diversity and inclusion,” I take the view
that such schemes are morally wrong, since they discriminate between people,
not on the basis of their behaviour, but by skin colour or other
characteristics outside their control.
And don’t think that the Lib Dems or Greens are any less
zealots for the woke, green religion than the Tories have been. Lib Dem
controlled Godalming Town Council want to: “Support and promote Equality,
Diversity and Inclusion.” “Promote at least 10% Biodiversity Net Gain on
private land and ensure it on land that we own.” “Promote an understanding of
the climate and ecological crisis amongst our community and work together on
strategies for reduction of individual carbon footprint.” And “Support
divestment in fossil fuels and oppose development of new sources for fossil
fuels through ‘fracking,’ ‘acidisation,’ drilling and other unsustainable
approaches.” Madness.
What have we actually got for our money?
What have SCC actually delivered for us in their term of
office? That started in 2021 under Tory control, but as residents have vented
their anger at successive by-elections, the Lib Dems have been the
beneficiaries. The council is now under no overall control.
The Tories have set a transport policy in Surrey that is
aggressively anti-car. But Lib Dems and Greens have a similar mind-set, too.
They do not seem to understand that the remoter parts of Surrey, including
ours, are rural areas. In which public transport, away from the major train
corridors, is very limited. For anyone who lives, or needs to go, outside these
corridors, a car is all but essential. Drivers pay council tax too, and they
deserve service, not persecution.
In recent years, potholes have been the biggest problem on
Surrey’s roads. This winter, they have been worse than ever. But right now, the
profusion of road works and road closures, often over long periods, is an even
bigger issue. Road blockages seem to spring up without warning; sometimes two
on the same route at the same time, as recently in Farncombe and Binscombe. SCC
is treating the road users it is supposed to be serving with disdain.
Meanwhile, we already have 20mph speed limits in Shalford,
Shackleford and Puttenham. There are draconian “traffic calming” proposals for
Compton, which lies on a strategic through road. And proposals for junction
narrowing, raised tables and speed bumps, and 20mph limits on just about every
road within a mile of Farncombe centre (including two steep hills), have just
finished the second round of “consultation.”
Moreover, council tax goes up every year, by as near 5% as
they can make it. And some parts of it (like Godalming Town Council’s) go up
even more. My next year’s bill is £2,000, as near as damn it. And that’s with
the single person discount.
Influence of the WHO
There is also a “Vision Zero” road safety scheme,
particularly pushed by the Lib Dem caucus. This is a project of the UN,
originating with its World Health Organization (WHO). You may recall the WHO’s
support for China and for lockdowns during COVID, and its desire to take total world-wide
control of responses to future pandemics. This is not an organization I, for
one, want to have any say at all in how I live my life.
Indeed, the WHO has also been the driver of UK policy on
what the government call “clean air,” which you and I know as “air pollution.”
And the UK Committee on Medical Effects of Air Pollution (COMEAP), have tried,
in ways I consider dishonest, to make out that air pollution today is a far
bigger problem that it is in reality.
Local government re-organization
Before about 1965, the organization of local government in
the UK was two-tier, with more than 1,000 county, district and town councils.
In the late 1960s, Labour sought to consolidate the structure, to one that was
single-tier over most of the country. But the Tory victory in the 1970 general
election meant that the two-tier system was retained. This produced the
existing county and borough structure, which came into effect in 1974.
The recent change, which has resulted in the creation of
West Surrey, is being sold under the banner of “devolution.” Devolution ought
to mean bringing government closer to home, making smaller units that are more
flexible to local needs and desires. But what Labour are doing is precisely the
opposite.
SCC had signed up to a “devolution” agreement with the Tory
government early in 2024, which gave SCC itself new powers. But in September
2024, the incoming Labour government published a plan. This identified the
likely option for places like Surrey as: “non-mayoral devolution or division
into two or more unitary councils.”
Labour’s “devolution” white paper in December went much
further. It said: “Our goal is simple. Universal coverage in England of
Strategic Authorities – which should be a number of councils working together,
covering areas that people recognise and work in.” And: “these reforms should
be treated as stepping stones towards more ambitious settlements within the
next few years, in line with our detailed regional recommendations.”
As to the longer term: “A potential alternative path to
deeper devolution would be for Surrey to unitarise the county… The next step
could be the establishment of a mayoral combined authority at the county scale,
with the several unitaries as constituent members.” That does, indeed, seem to
be the direction in which Labour are heading with regard to Surrey’s future.
Mayoral Strategic Authorities
Labour’s attitude is that “the benefits of devolution are
best achieved through the establishment of combined institutions with a
directly elected mayor.” In time, they want to impose mayoral systems
everywhere. Even in areas which have never before had mayors above the level of
individual towns. Again, this is centralizing power, not devolving it.
Mayoral Strategic Authorities can include “constituent
authorities,” defined as “local authorities where a strategic authority
exists.” In Surrey, the unitary authorities would eventually be constituents of
a giant strategic authority, likely run by a “Mayor of Surrey.”
Mayors will have considerable powers, both formal and less
so. How the unitary councillors are to represent local people in the face of a
mayor is, to say the least, unclear. But we know already that unitary councils
will not be able to overrule a mayor’s transport plan. And as we know from the
ULEZ expansion, even local MPs are powerless against an activist mayor.
Labour’s vision of “devolution” is one of top-down command and control, not one
that allows local people to do things in the ways that are best for them.
And what will a “mayoral strategic authority” do, beyond
what local councils do at the moment? It will have: “Ability to introduce
mayoral precepting on council tax.” “Active Travel England support for
constituent authority capability.” “A duty to produce a Spatial Development
Strategy.” “Ability to raise a Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy.” “Heat
network zoning co-ordination role.” “Green jobs and skills co-ordination role.”
“A strategic role on net zero in collaboration with government.” “Responsibility
for co-ordinating delivery and monitoring of Local Nature Recovery Strategies.”
“A bespoke statutory health improvement and health inequalities duty.” Yeah,
right. Lots of stuff we don’t need or want, and nothing that we do.
All this is in the future, and the dates are unclear. But
without a very significant Reform UK presence in the new West Surrey unitary, the
erosion of the freedoms of the people of Surrey will inevitably continue.
The cancellation of the 2025 elections
In December 2024, the minister for local government wrote to
the leaders of two-tier councils, including SCC, warning that they would be
required to supply proposals very soon for re-organization into unitary
authorities. SCC Tories responded eagerly, requesting postponement of the
elections scheduled for May 2025. Which was granted.
With hindsight, those elections weren’t postponed; they were
cancelled. Voters lost all chance to change the direction SCC was going in. And
the next time they had a chance to vote, it would be for a new system they
hadn’t even been consulted on. Meanwhile, the Tories got themselves two extra
years in power, for which they had no democratic mandate.
Most of the borough and district councils in Surrey
(understandably) disagreed with SCC’s desire to postpone the May 2025
elections. But they were ignored. Instead, a “final plan” for re-organization
was prepared, and rammed through SCC by the Tories, over the protestations of
the other parties. This plan offered us a false “choice” between two setups,
one where Surrey was split into two unitary authorities, and one where it was
split into three. The sanest option, of sorting out the financial issues first and
then deciding, slowly, what was the best way forward for the people, was never
even considered.
There was a “consultation” over the summer, allowing us to
choose between the two. Within this restricted choice, the Lib Dems favoured
the three-unitary option, and so did our local Reform UK branch. But as usual,
the consultation was a sham; the result had already been decided. The
two-unitary setup won.
A tale of two unitaries
So, we are now taking the first steps of a re-organization
that Labour and the Tories wanted, and just about no-one else.
Eleven borough councils, eight of which were reasonably
functional, together with SCC itself, will be abolished in April 2027. They
will be replaced by two Unitary Authority mega-councils, West Surrey and East
Surrey. In the process, the more than 450 councillors on the county and borough
councils will be replaced by just 162. This is devolution? This is bringing
local government closer to home? Pull the other one.
Meanwhile, the current councillors continue to run the show,
without any democratic mandate. The establishment parties continue to impose on
us their pet virtue-signalling projects, like cycle greenways and 20mph speed
limits, that are negatives to many of us. And, because the newly elected
councillors will not take on their powers until April 2027, the incumbents have
carte blanche to continue doing these things to us for another year!
West Surrey is born
West Surrey will be formed in April 2027 from six former
boroughs: Waverley, Guildford, Surrey Heath, Woking, Runnymede and Spelthorne.
All three of the boroughs in big financial trouble have been
placed in West Surrey. This is bound to cause big problems for people in our
constituency, which spans part of Guildford borough and part of Waverley. The
debt West Surrey will have when it starts is estimated at £4 billion. Spread
across a population of around 685,000, this is just under £6,000 per resident,
or £8,000 per elector.
And who will be expected to pay off that debt? Council tax
payers. Not just in Woking, Spelthorne and Runnymede, but in Waverley,
Guildford and Surrey Heath too.
House building targets
A major issue in local politics, about which few people seem
to be aware, is house building targets. The population of the UK is increasing,
mostly through immigration. Those people have to go somewhere. And both the
Tories and Labour seem to have singled out our part of Surrey for a particularly
large population increase.
They have set (mandatory) house building targets for
Waverley, which amount to an increase of more than 50% in the population in the
20 years to 2043. And this is in an area 80% of which is protected, either as
Green Belt or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Waverley Borough Council are,
rightly, objecting to the target as unachievable. Meanwhile, Guildford’s target
is not much lower, amounting to a population increase of more than 30%. There
is no doubt that the character of our beautiful area, and our green spaces, are
under serious threat.
Reform UK support development only on “brownfield” sites,
that have previously been developed. We oppose large scale development on green
belt land, and it is important to us that local people must give their consent
to development proposals.
In conclusion
If you have read this far, thank you. I hope you will agree
that, for anyone who cares about the people of Surrey rather than about woke
and green policies, Reform UK is the only voting option on May 7th.
I will end as I began: If you feel you want to join or to
donate to Reform UK, you can do so via our donations page here: https://donate.reformparty.uk/godalming-ash.
Neil Lock is campaign manager for
Reform UK Godalming and Ash branch.
No comments:
Post a Comment