At the first meeting of the new West Surrey Council the Liberal Democrat leader Paul Follows stated that he intended to “roll out the most comprehensive localism agenda that the United Kingdom has ever seen”.

I am waiting with great interest to hear what exactly he is proposing, although almost certainly it is likely to mean the transfer of some powers to town and parish councils, which will continue to exist following the abolition of Surrey County Council and all district and borough councils.

While I personally support a comprehensive localism agenda, especially in a new unitary authority which has a population of over 660,000 and covers a vast and diverse geographical area stretching from Staines to Haslemere, the transfer of any powers involves increased duties and responsibilities which will result in increased costs also being transferred.

For town and parish councils the main revenue source is the precept included as part of council tax. At present there is no restriction on the level of precept town and parish councils can charge, whereas any increase in council tax that West Surrey can implement is capped at 4.99 per cent.

Over recent years town and parish councils have faced difficult decisions as a number of discretionary services provided by existing councils, particularly Surrey County Council, have ceased to be funded.

In response, Farnham Town Council decided to spend £90,000 on the provision of youth services and this year is allocating an additional £50,000 in community grants to a number of organisations, many of which are run by volunteers, that provide essential services for those most vulnerable in society.

These additional costs have to date mainly been paid for by increasing the precept. Due to prudent management under a period of local control by Farnham Residents, the precept charged by Farnham Town Council has over the last decade reduced from being £5.43 higher in 2013 to being £8.77 lower in 2025 than the national average precept charged by town and parish councils.

At the recent meeting of town council electors questions were, however, starting to be asked of how Farnham Town Council can justify increases in precept which are higher than general inflation.

While these increases appear significant in percentage terms, in absolute terms these increases amount to very small amounts of actual money.

While the level of precept charged by Farnham Town Council represents only four per cent of total council tax, there is only a limited amount of additional powers that could actually be taken on without significantly increasing the precept.

The only way that town and parish councils could take advantage of any localism that the Liberal Democrats are likely to offer, without having to significantly increase the precept, is by also transferring assets that raise revenue, such as car parks.

Given West Surrey's current financial position with all its inherited debts, one wonders if the Liberal Democrat administration at West Surrey would be able, willing or even allowed by central government to transfer assets such as car parks.

Next year there are town and parish council elections, and given the current concerns over the cost of living there is going to be an understandable reluctance to significantly increase precepts.

While Paul Follows may wish to have a "comprehensive localism agenda", whether town and parish councils will be able to take advantage of what may be offered will be another matter.

David Beaman

Waverley borough and Farnham town independent Farnham resident councillor

Farnham North West ward

Highfield Close

Farnham

It was shocking to hear of the McDonald’s plans for Tice’s Meadow, given Farnham’s historic links with the McLibel case - a case that went on for ten years.

Let’s hope this campaign victory is not overturned. As Cllr Jackman said: “The proposal was simply the wrong thing in the wrong place.”

Anyone who has read the book Fast Food Nation will understand why out of respect we should not have a McDonald’s in Farnham.

Yes, history repeats itself, but history also provides us with an opportunity to learn and respect the past. Well done and thank you to all of the campaigners.

Chris McCabe

Old Compton Lane

Farnham

In response to an East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) press release (EHDC planning committee praised in independent report), Fight4FourMarks would like to comment.

The press release refers to a Planning Advisory Service (PAS) report commissioned by EHDC in early 2026. What this press release forgets to mention is the context in which this PAS report was commissioned.

The press release said: “EHDC has invited an independent panel to review its planning committee operations as it looks to ensure decision-making is as effective and robust as possible.”

However it is stated within the EHDC report for the May 28 cabinet meeting that the PAS was required to be “called in” by EHDC due to the risk and threat of EHDC being put in “special measures” by the government due to the poor quality of the planning committee’s decisions on planning applications.

In its report, the PAS said: “EHDC contacted the PAS in August 2025 because it had identified that it is potentially under threat of designation under Section 62B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 due to the quality of major applications’ decision-making.”

So the first sentence of the press release is blatant spin. The context of needing the PAS report was that there was a threat to EHDC, not a nicety of inviting them to take a look.

The PAS report added: “The relationship between the district council, residents’ representatives and parish and town councils is a particular concern to the PAS team, and we consider that this needs urgent attention.”

This relationship with the public is seen by the public as paramount. The public expect their three-minute deputations are not to be merely tolerated and then ignored in the meeting.

Dr Arthur Barlow

Chair, Fight4FourMarks

Lymington Bottom

Four Marks