You probably knew 999 calls are recorded but did you know your conversations with individual Surrey Police Officers were being secretly recorded without you knowing? Surrey Police has escaped a fine for its mass breach of privacy and has received a serious reprimand from the UK’s data authority. The Information Commissioner Office issued yesterday the press release below.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has issued a reprimand to Surrey Police following the rollout of an app that recorded phone conversations and unlawfully captured personal data.

In June 2020, the ICO became aware that staff members across both police forces had access to an app that recorded all incoming and outgoing phone calls. 1,015 staff members downloaded the app onto their work mobile phones and more than 200,000 recordings of phone conversations, likely with victims, witnesses, and perpetrators of suspected crimes, were automatically saved.

The ICO considered it highly likely that the app captured a large variety of personal data during these calls and it considered that the processing of some of this data was unfair and unlawful. Police officers that downloaded the app were unaware that all calls would be recorded, and people were not informed that their conversations with officers were being recorded.

The app was first made available in 2016 and was originally intended to be used as recording software by a small number of specific officers, but Surrey Police and Sussex Police chose to make the app available for all staff to download. The app has now been withdrawn from use and the recordings, other than those considered to be evidential material, have been destroyed.

The ICO has applied its revised public sector approach to this case – instead of issuing a £1m fine to both Surrey Police and Sussex Police, they have each received a formal reprimand. The ICO’s approach aims to reduce the impact of fines on those accessing public services and to encourage greater data protection compliance from public authorities to prevent harms from occurring in the first place.

“Sussex Police and Surrey Police failed to use people’s personal data lawfully by recording hundreds of thousands of phone calls without their knowledge. People have the right to expect that when they speak to a police officer, the information they disclose is handled responsibly. We can only estimate the huge amount of personal data collected during these conversations, including highly sensitive information relating to suspected crimes.

“The reprimand reflects the use of the ICO’s wider powers towards the public sector as large fines could lead to reduced budgets for the provision of vital services. This case highlights why the ICO is pursuing a different approach, as fining Surrey Police and Sussex Police risks impacting the victims of crime in the area once again.

“This case should be a lesson learned to any organisation planning to introduce an app, product or service that uses people’s personal data. Organisations must consider people’s data protection rights and implement data protection principles from the very start.”

– Stephen Bonner, ICO Deputy Commissioner – Regulatory Supervision

Recommendations

The ICO recommended that Surrey Police and Sussex Police should take action to ensure their compliance with data protection law, including:

• Deployment of any new apps should consider data protection at the very beginning and document the process. A specific team should consider the method and means of data processing, with remedial action taken to ensure processing is compliant with current data protection legislation prior to the app being deployed.
• Instruction and data protection guidance should be issued to staff in respect of the use of any apps, with officers required to confirm that issued guidance has been read and understood.
• Review existing policies and procedures to ensure that adequate consideration has been given to data subject rights during the processing of personal data and special category data.
• Review the content of data protection training, particularly in respect of law enforcement processing.

The ICO has asked Surrey Police and Sussex Police to provide details of actions taken to address these recommendations within three months of the reprimand being issued.

A new countywide, partnership strategy has been agreed to boost the county’s collective efforts to end Violence Against Women and Girls in Surrey. Work will now commence with partners across Surrey on an action plan to support work over the next three-years

The Surrey Partnership VAWG Strategy was developed with the County’s key partners, including survivors and communities, specialist service provision, police, education and health, to build upon the extensive work already in progress to end VAWG, such as our Safer Streets initiative. The response will address VAWG across four pillars: Prepare, Prevent, Protect and Pursue. These pillars underpin four key objectives: prevent violence against women and girls, support victims and survivors, hold perpetrators to account and partnership working.

The strategy frames all crime types we know to disproportionally affect women and girls, such as domestic abuse, sexual offences, and ‘honour’ based abuse, under the framework of tackling violence against women and girls.

It goes wider to include educating children on respectful relationships, tackling sexism in the office, and harassment and intimidation of women and girls in Surrey’s communities. The County recognise that VAWG impacts LGBTQ+, minoritised communities and children and adults with care and support needs in different ways, and the authority will look to collaborate with specialist service provision to ensure an intersectional approach to supporting all survivors, and work to break down additional barriers.

Harnessing the experiences and knowledge of all partners across the County’s multi-agency network, the strategy will set out its shared vision, principles, and commitments. The governance framework will ensure accountability and enable effective implementation of action plans by their partners.

Informed by the lived experience of women and girls within Surrey, the work of the partnership will help to empower survivors, help them to feel safe and be safe, hold perpetrators to account and bring them to justice.

Joanna Killian, Chief Executive Surrey County Council said: “With the launch of our new county wide partnership VAWG strategy we strive to end violence against women and girls in Surrey. The safety of women and girls within our communities is a top priority for us, and we must ensure that they have opportunities to flourish without fear for their safety. For too long abuse, violence, and harmful attitudes towards women and girls has been allowed to thrive, this stops with us. This partnership strategy ensures collective action to tackle all forms of VAWG within Surrey, and we hope to be a beacon of best practice for other counties across the UK. Together, with our residents, specialist services, partners, and the expertise of women and girls, we will achieve our collective goal.”

Epsom and Ewell Times has reported before about anxieties around the new requirement for photo ID for voters at the upcoming local elections 4th May. LDRS reports on anxieties in the Surrey Borough of Runnymede which are no doubt shared in Epsom and Ewell:

Don’t leave getting your voter ID for the May local elections sorted until the last minute. That is the message from Runnymede Borough Council’s election manager as the deadline to secure proof approaches.

Local elections are taking place this year on Thursday May 4 and this year, for the first time, every voter heading to a polling station in England must show a photo ID in order to cast their ballot.

Councils across Surrey have been rolling out communication pushes as the “last thing they want” is to be turning people away at the polls. Kath Richards is the election manager for Runnymede Borough Council. She said: “The deadline to apply for voter id is April 25 at 5pm. After the 25th there is nothing they can do. My concern is people will leave it until the last minute. The nearer the election day they’ve got to rely on the post. If they leave it they might have to collect it themselves. We don’t know if there is going to be a rush.”

There are a host of valid IDs that will be accepted on the day, including expired official documents such as passports, so long as there is still a strong resemblance to the photograph.

Those who do not own an accepted ID can apply for what is known as the free Voter Authority Certificate – a fast track card that will allow people to vote.

However, the deadline to apply is fast approaching leading to fears some may leave it too late. Applying for the voter card can be done online. Residents upload a photo of themselves and it lands with the council where it is then checked to ensure the person is who they say they are.

After that it is sent to a printing company in Sunderland before being posted back to people’s homes.

So far Runnymede has received about 60 applications – which have come through ‘in dribs and drabs’ despite the communications push that saw notices go up on bins, banners and through people’s doors.

She said: “We don’t want people to turn up on the day and not be able to vote because they’ve not got the right information. The ID needs to be an original document. I’ve got a picture of my passport on my phone but I can’t use it. I can be an out of date passport as long as the picture bears a resemblance. If you still look like the picture in your passport it will still be accepted. I don’t want to be in a position where somebody says they don’t know about it. The last thing we want to do is turn people away.”

She estimates that there are between two and eight per cent of the voting population who do not have a valid photo ID.

Not a massive figure in a population of about 60,000 voters but enough to potentially swing the balance in wards where there is a small majority.

Accepted forms of photo ID:

You can use any of the following accepted forms of photo ID when voting at a polling station.

International travel
Passport issued by the UK, any of the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, a British Overseas Territory, an EEA state or a Commonwealth country

Driving and Parking
Driving licence issued by the UK, any of the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, or an EEA state (this includes a provisional driving licence)
A Blue Badge

Local travel
Older Person’s Bus Pass funded by the Government of the United Kingdom
Disabled Person’s Bus Pass funded by the Government of the United Kingdom
Oyster 60+ Card funded by the Government of the United Kingdom
Freedom Pass
Scottish National Entitlement Card
60 and Over Welsh Concessionary Travel Card
Disabled Person’s Welsh Concessionary Travel Card
Senior SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
Registered Blind SmartPass or Blind Person’s SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
War Disablement SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
60+ SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
Half Fare SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland

Proof of age
Identity card bearing the Proof of Age Standards Scheme hologram (a PASS card)
Other government issued documents
Biometric immigration document
Ministry of Defence Form 90 (Defence Identity Card)
National identity card issued by an EEA state
Electoral Identity Card issued in Northern Ireland
Voter Authority Certificate
Anonymous Elector’s Document

The name on your ID should be the same name you used to register to vote.

Those who have registered to vote anonymously and want to vote in person, need to apply for an Anonymous Elector’s Document.

Voter ID cards can be applied for via the Government’s website

Related reports:

Register to vote deadline for elections

Worrying about voter ID law

No photo – no vote!

(Image: SecretLondon Creative Commons)

On Saturday Epsom and Ewell FC secured an extremely important three points against promotion rivals Selsey, defeating them by the same score line of 3-2 that we had in deepest Sussex back in March. As with that match, this encounter contained some twists and turns but ultimately went our way due to another late winner, this time from Lewis Pearch, whose first goal for our club may turn out to be one of the most important of the season.

Going into this contest, we already knew that two wins from our remaining three matches would guarantee us the second playoff spot, barring a very unlikely swing of goal difference, but we also knew that Selsey still had aspirations to qualify themselves, so this was always going to be a tight encounter. With current Manager Barry Gartell away, Matt Chapman again took charge and we made just one change to the starting eleven from Wednesday’s draw against Mile Oak with Steve Springett coming in for the absent Kevin Moreno-Gomez. However, Springett was not played in his regular left back slot in this match, instead playing in the centre of defence with Gideon Acheampong reverting to right back and Johnny “Sonic” Akoto moving over to the left, maybe as a design to try to use his speed to keep visiting danger man Shane Brazil as quiet as possible, and the pair of them had a decent battle today.

We needed a good start and for the first time in weeks, we got one in the ninth minute. A superb interchange of passes between Jaan Stanley and Jaevon Dyer on the right resulted in a ball across the edge of the penalty area to Athan Smith-Joseph, who took a touch, headed back across to the right before suddenly drilling the ball back across Syd Davies into the Selsey net from 18 yards.

Unfortunately that would prove to be the extent of Smith-Joseph’s involvement as he aggravated his hamstring a few minutes later and limped off, to be replaced on the left wing by Pearch. Hopefully he will not be out for very long as it was clear that our replacement didn’t really carry the same threat in a position that admittedly isn’t his primary one.

Another injury would also prove pivotal in the 28th minute as a couple of our players went up with Davies for a right wing cross and Stanley collided with the keeper, catching him around the knee. I’ll be honest, it looked fairly innocuous at the time but despite treatment Davies would require another bit of work with the physio shortly after and was strapped up for the remainder of the half before being replaced at half time by Ryan Matlock.

At this point, I was hoping that our players would get a chance to test him out with a couple of shots, but the visitors were actually getting back into the match and kept the ball away from him for a while. Then things got worse for us as they equalised from a harmless looking free kick over on the Selsey left wing in the 40th minute as Corey Burns nipped ahead of Tom Theobald to reach the near post delivery and flick it past him from close range, although it would have been nice to have seen a defender somewhere near him!

However, before half time we were back in front. Jamie Byatt collected the ball around twenty yards out in the third minute of injury time and decided that he did indeed want to test their limping keeper out, striking a beauty from twenty yards that just sailed over the rather stationary Davies. It was a superb piece of opportunism and of all the 40, yes 40 goals Byatt has now scored for us in under two seasons, this was probably the one that was from the furthest distance!

We were arguably a little fortunate to be ahead at the half, but it was irrelevant soon after anyway as the visitors equalised in the 51st minute. We had already had a scare when Brazil’s shot had gone wide of the goal, but from a corner shortly afterwards, Theobald tried to punch the ball clear, only to knock the ball straight onto the shoulder of Bradley Vaughan from where the ball rebounded into the net.

At 2-2 this match really could have gone either way. We wobbled for a few minutes and Theobald redeemed himself with a superb double save after a Selsey shot had rebounded back to a striker off the foot of his right hand post, blocking the subsequent header and then a follow up shot which he turned wide for a corner.

With the clock on 68 minutes we brought on Thompson Adeyemi and Rory Edwards to give us fresh legs and Adeyemi set up Dyer who crumpled under a challenge from Matlock, even though there was no contact and was fortunate not to be booked for simulation, although Burns did pick up a card for Selsey around the same time for a handball.

As we started to enter the closing stages though, we began to get a little more possession and Springett sent a thirty yard free kick just wide of the post. With George Owusu already on for Dyer, Alex Penfold then came on for Nick Wilson with Springett moving over onto the left wing and releasing Pearch to a more central position alongside Byatt. This tactical move would prove pivotal in the 91st minute as a deep Penfold free kick was only headed half clear by Bradley Higgins-Pearce under pressure from Adeyemi and the ball fell to Pearch, standing just beyond the penalty spot and he guided his header over everyone and into the net for what proved to be the winner.

At the end there was a lot of celebration from our players, perhaps too much when considering that we still have much work to do to gain promotion. However, part of this probably came from the relief of winning a match that looked like it was turning against us and also guaranteed us a playoff spot, so it was understandable. Now we have to make sure that we get three more points to ensure that this home match wasn’t our last ever at Fetcham Grove. We’re not quite ready to leave just yet!

Epsom & Ewell: Tom Theobald, Gideon Acheampong, Johnny Akoto, Nick Wilson, Dylan Merchant, Steve Springett, Jaevon Dyer, Gavin Quintyne, Jamie Byatt, Jaan Stanley, Athan Smith-Joseph

Subs: Lewis Pearch for Smith-Joseph (17), Thompson Adeyemi for Stanley (68), Rory Edwards for Quintyne (68), George Owusu for Dyer (78), Alex Penfold for Wilson (85)

With local controversies about the draft Local Plan eyeing up Green Belt, Epsom and Ewell Borough Council soon decides on two Town proposals. LDRS reports:

Plans for a care home on the site of the former Epsom police station and ambulance station are set for refusal by councillors. The planned building, a 96-bed care in Church Street in Epsom, would be over three to five storeys, but council officers have raised concern about its “overly-domineering” impact on the surrounding area.

A meeting of Epsom and Ewell Borough Council’s planning committee on Thursday (April 20) will make a decision on the application.

The 96 bedrooms in the proposed home would provide nursing, residential and dedicated dementia care, and would have en suite wet rooms.

There are 20 listed buildings in the The Church Street Conservation Area, which wraps around the south and west ends of the site. Officers said the scale, form, design and materials of the plans would cause “cause less than substantial harm” to the nearby listed buildings including Hermitage (Grade II Listed), Ashley Cottages (Grade II Listed) and The Cedars (Grade II* Listed).

A council report into the care home said the building would “represent an overly domineering and incongruous addition that would fail to integrate with the prevailing character and appearance of the area”.

Concerns were also raised about the future of trees on the site including a cedar and a lime tree during excavation works for the development.

At the same meeting, councillors should make a decision on a plan for 20 homes in a five- and six-storey development on the corner of West Street and Station Approach in the town.

The plans, which would include just two affordable homes and five parking spaces, received 51 letters of objection raising concerns about the impact on the character of the town, and the loss of the existing building.
Officers have recommended the plans be approved, which would include the demolition of the current 1905 building which was originally a corn and coal merchants.

The redevelopment of the former Gillespie’s Bakery building has been objected to by the county council’s highways authority, because of the need to reduce the width of the existing pavement and cycle path.

Under a previous application, the highways authority had not objected to plans, but since then a stronger policy had been adopted to improve travel methods for pedestrians and cyclists, leading to the objection.

Despite the five car parking spaces not meeting the council’s guidelines for parking, an officers’ report said: “The site is in a highly sustainable location with access to a number of public transport modes and the displaced parking can be accommodated in adjacent public car parks and via on street parking.”

The two affordable homes in the plans also fall below the council’s affordable housing recommendations, but a 40 per cent provision would “substantially affect the overall viability of the scheme”, according to council documents.

The meeting will take place on Thursday, April 20 at 7.30pm.

Related reports:

West Street developers climbing down enough?

From custody to caring – new plans for Epsom’s old nick.

The High Court legal challenge into oil drilling at Dunsfold has been confirmed for June 8. The case will examine planning permission granted for exploratory drilling of £123million of oil near the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The UK Oil and Gas (UKOG) was originally refused planning permission to search for fossil fuels at Loxley Well in Dunsfold in December 2020 by Surrey County Council’s planning committee.

UKOG appealed in June 2022 after a public inquiry and was given the green light by the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, led by Surrey Heath MP Michael Gove.

Almost immediately, Waverley Borough Council challenged the appeal decision in the High Court with £13,000 set aside for the legal challenge.

In March this year anti-fracking campaigners celebrated the news that the case would be heard in the High Court after being granted a judicial review.

The June 8 date was pencilled in for the hearing, and this week it was set in stone after some discussion over potentially moving the date.

The case has been picked up by the Good Law Project and is being challenged on two fronts. The first, they argue, relates to the “inconsistency in decision-making by the Secretary of State” who approved Dunsfold drilling the same day he refused a comparable site in Ellesmere Port over greenhouse gas emissions. The second argument relates to the drilling site being on the edge of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and national policy requires planning decisions to give great weight to “conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty” in AONBs.

Good Law Project legal manager, Jennine Walker said: “Let’s be clear: exploiting our natural landscape for fossil fuels should be a thing of the past and is completely at odds with our crucial efforts to reach net-zero. This is why we are delighted to be supporting the next stage of Protect Dunsfold’s legal challenge which seeks to overturn the Government’s scandalous decision to overrule the local council and give the green light to a gas exploration scheme in the Surrey Hills.

“The High Court recently confirmed Protect Dunsfold’s case is arguable and we now look forward to the hearing in June at which we hope the Judge will overturn the Government’s scandalous decision”.

MP Jeremy Hunt said the plans should be “formally shelved” altogether.

A crowdfunding page has also been launched for those looking to support the legal challenge.

Related reports:

Surrey MPs oppose each other on drills in the hills

The Hills Are Alive With the Sound of Drilling… ?

Fractious Court case anticipated

Image: Residents strongly campaigned against an exploratory well (Image: Surrey Advertiser)

Danny Baker – The Sausage Sandwich Tour– Epsom Playhouse – 12 April 2023. A review by Epsom and Ewell Times.

Once television’s go to cheeky chappie Cockney, Danny Baker demonstrates how much more there is to his life and career than that lazy characterisation: West End record shop assistant at 14, partying with Elton John and Rod Stewart by 17, co-founder of Sniffin’ Glue underground punk magazine at 19, New Musical Express journalist, TV presenter, radio host, script writer to Jonathan Ross, Chris Evans, Peter Kay, Ricky Gervais et al all by 40, and now at 66 add to that list raconteur touring the country and playing to sell-out audiences with his stand-up show.

Stand-up? More like stand still, Danny for Pete’s sake! Baker notches up his 10,000 steps comfortably in the first half as he walks to and fro across the stage in his fezz and brandishing a wand. After four hours we are exhausted, one can only imagine how Baker is feeling. Leaving the Playhouse at 11.20 p.m. after kicking off at 7.30 p.m. you can see that our host is giving the late Ken Dodd a run for his money in giving his audiences value for money.

The wonderful undercurrent of Danny’s life is the sheer unpredictability of it. John Lennon once famously said ‘Life is what happens to you when you’re busy making other plans’, well in Danny’s case life is what happened to him when he was busy making no plans whatsoever. Driven only by the advice from his Dad never to sign on because ‘then, they’ve got you’,  Danny meandered into one fabulous job after another. Of course, if he wasn’t innately talented and possessing a natural connection with audiences of all kinds he would have fallen at the first hurdle. Baker also has bucketloads of gumption.

Danny hurtles through his life until his knee deep in the names he has dropped. But, why not? He has worked with and knows nearly everyone from Q4 20^th century popular culture. But his feet remain firmly planted in Deptford soil as he refused to play the celeb game. Despite it all he remains one of us, not one of them. He’s our imposter in their world. He’s a fighter, shaking off cancellation and cancer along the way. He’s funny. He doesn’t do emoting. He has no messages for us. If there is an opposite to virtue signalling this show is it. He has no lofty pronouncements on his “art”. Instead, he tells us his nice home is “the house that Daz built”, referencing his cringy TV ads from the 1990s. Danny Baker is an unvarnished old school cockney and there are few left. Go and see him while you can.

Epsom and Ewell residents will go to the polls on May 4 to elect their councillors for the next four years.

All 35 seats on the council are up for election in Surrey’s smallest borough, and elections are taking place at the other ten lower-tier authorities in the county as well.

The election at Epsom and Ewell Borough Council comes just six weeks after members voted for a pause to the plan for homes in the borough in order to re-consider the inclusion of green belt sites such as Horton Farm being used for homes.

The council is currently led by Residents’ Association councillors and has been since it was founded in 1938. Residents will elect councillors to 14 wards this year, with a new ward added in Horton.

Below we list all the candidates standing across the borough:

College
Kate Emily Brooks – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell
Nigel Kenneth Benno Sippel Collin – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Charlotte Mary Day – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Julian Peter Freeman – Liberal Democrat Focus Team
James John Lawrence – Liberal Democrat Focus Team
Helen Lewis – Labour Party 
Julie Anne Morris – Liberal Democrat Focus Team 
Christopher Charles Muller – Conservative
Tom Peer – Conservative
Michael John Ware – Conservative
Court
Chris Ames – Labour Party 
Christine Rosemary Beams – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Kate Chinn – Labour Party
Rob Geleit – Labour Party
David Erwin Lyndsay – Conservative
Geoffrey Christopher Pope – Conservative
Karen Seidel – Liberal Democrat 
Sandy Smyth – Conservative
Mary Catherine Sullivan – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
David Michael Triggs – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Cuddington
Caroline Barretto – Labour Party
Dan Brown – Liberal Democrat 
Kevin Rhys Davies – Labour Party 
Garrett Michael Doran – Conservative
Alex Paul Hawkes Cole – Conservative
Graham Owen Jones – Residents’ Association of Cuddington 
Phil Neale – Residents’ Association of Cuddington 
Arun Matyjas Saini – Liberal Democrat 
Rajesh Saini – Liberal Democrat
Kim Spickett – Residents’ Association of Cuddington 
Lynn Walker – Conservative
Ewell Court
Tamas Balog – Liberal Democrat 
Tom Chaloner – Conservative
Oliver Nathaniel Clement – Conservative
Dan Edwards – Labour Party
David Walter Gulland – Liberal Democrat 
Debbie Monksfield – Labour Party 
Peter William O’donovan – Ewell Court Residents’ Association
Christopher Robin John Watson – Ewell Court Residents’ Association 
Ewell Village
Christine Gladys Cleveland – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
andrew Nicholas Cook – Conservative
Sandra Noel Hatfield – Labour Party
Kenneth John Kimber – Liberal Democrat 
andrej Kubicek – Liberal Democrat 
David Anthony Lee – Green Party 
Graham Rapier – Conservative
Clive David Woodbridge – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Horton
Ros Godson – Labour Party 
Eber Alan Kington – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell
Henal Vinod Ladwa – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Philip Mclauchlan – Liberal Democrat 
Bernie Muir – Conservative
Kieran Persand – Conservative
Mark Christian Todd – Labour Party
Paul Stephen Vagg – Liberal Democrat
Nonsuch
Jamie Abrahams – Conservative
Janice Baker – Green Party
Stephen William Dixon – Liberal Democrat 
Shanice Goldman – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Gaye Hadfield – Labour Party
Christine Anne Howells – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Robert Leach – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Steven Liu – Conservative
Gary Derek Peters – Liberal Democrat 
Sharon Marie Stead – Liberal Democrat 
Ajay Kumar Uppal – Conservative
Ian Leslie Ward – Labour Party
Ruxley
Rob Adnitt – Labour Party
Joseph Ojo Alawo – Conservative 
Catherine Anne Carver-Hill – Labour Party 
Alex Coley – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
David Raymond John Collins – Conservative
David Michael Kidd – Green Party
Jan Mason – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Marian Paula Morrison – Liberal Democrat
Stamford
Andrew Darren Bailey – Green Party
Steve Bridger – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
David Colleton Buxton – Liberal Democrat Focus Team 
Richard William Chinn – Labour Party 
Alison Kelly – Liberal Democrat Focus Team
Karen Landles – Labour Party
Martin Olney – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell
Aaron Persand – Conservative
Stephen Pontin – Conservative
Stoneleigh
Rusmat Roland Arthur Ahmed – Liberal Democrat
Charlotte Ann Angus – Conservative
Hannah Charlotte Emily Dalton – Stoneleigh and Auriol Residents’ Association 
Brian William Fisher – Liberal Democrat 
Anthony John Froud – Stoneleigh and Auriol Residents’ Association 
Sue Hoyle – Labour Party 
Tracy Margaret Muller – Conservative
Ragu Raymond – Labour Party
Town
Arthur Abdulin – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Neil andrew Dallen – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Danny Leonard Fullilove – Conservative
John Stuart Gosling – Labour Party
Yvonne Caroline Grunwald – Green Party 
Sarah Louise Kenyon – Labour Party
Rachel Sarah King – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Gillian Miles – Liberal Democrat
Jamie Joseph O’sullivan – Conservative
Philip Victor Pavey – Liberal Democrat
Meera Persand – Conservative
Sarah Louise Charlotte Whitworth – Liberal Democrat
West Ewell 
Jason George anderson – Labour Party 
Patrick Christopher Campion – Conservative
andrew John Casey – Liberal Democrat 
Linda Martha Chmiel – Liberal Democrat 
Tony Foster – Green Party 
Lisa Zahra Haghir – Liberal Democrat
Nafiz Huq – Conservative
Lucie Kimberley Mcintyre – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
O’sullivan Kitty – Conservative
Humphrey Reynolds – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Alan Keith Williamson – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Woodcote and Langley Vale
Abbey Bloom – Labour Party 
Liz Frost – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Bernice Froud – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Daniel Charles Martyr – Liberal Democrat 
Emily Lucia Cottam Martyr – Liberal Democrat
Steven John Mccormick – Residents’ Associations of Epsom and Ewell 
Jonathan Neil Parkinson – Green Party 
John Michael Payne – Liberal Democrat
Fiona Peer – Conservative
Henry Strausser – Conservative
Emma Charlotte Ware – Conservative
Mike Westbrook – Labour and Co-Operative Party 

Related reports:

Beginning to line up for local elections

Register to vote deadline for elections

4th May Surrey goes to the polls

Turn up to turn downturn in turnout!

Worrying about voter ID law

No photo – no vote!

People in Surrey are being urged to consider job opportunities in the Probation Service as HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) launches a recruitment drive in the area.

The new roles are open to a wide range of applicants, from those starting out to those with wider life or work experience. The roles are ideal for those looking for a rewarding career where they can both motivate and inspire others to change for the better, and build safer places to live.

HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) is already seeing people moving in to the sector from retail and hospitality with many recent new joiners also quitting office jobs for a more rewarding role in the service. The campaign hopes to inspire others to consider making the switch.

The number of people working in probation in Surrey and across Kent and Sussex has increased in the last twelve months. Currently there are 1,043 people* working in Probation Service roles and in 2022 the region welcomed 213 new joiners. Some have come forward to support the recruitment campaign and encourage other people to consider roles like theirs.

Jordan Hayes-Hussey, aged 25, is a case administrator from Godalming, Surrey. Jordan was working in marketing after completing a communication and media degree when he decided to change career and join the Probation Service. Jordan says:

“I joined the Probation Service because I wanted a role where I could work with people from different backgrounds, make a difference through my work and have opportunities to progress. It can be a fast-paced working environment but every day is different and it’s a really rewarding job.

You’ll need good communication skills, determination and an open mind to succeed but you’ll get training and support from a wider team as part of the role. If you’re interested in building new skills and working in a role that positively contributes to society I’d recommend applying.”

Amber Boyle, aged 24 is a probation services officer from Staines, Surrey. Amber completed a law degree and joined the Probation Service after working in the courts. Amber says:

“I decided to join the Probation Service after witnessing the positive impact probation staff had on offenders’ lives. I started working as a court case administrator and then applied internally to be a probation services officer. I find the role really rewarding and enjoy being able to give people the tools they need to improve their lives and get back on track.

The job, like any role, has its challenges and you need to be authentic and able to adapt your communication skills to suit the people you’re working with, but it’s a really worthwhile endeavour and you’ll be given the training and flexibility you need.”

Probation Service staff support offenders on their rehabilitation journey, helping them to make better life choices and reducing the chances they will re-offend.

HMPPS is looking to fill a number of roles including probation services officers, case administrators and trainee probation officers. The Probation Service works with over 230,000 people on probation serving community sentences and individuals who are pre or post-release from prison. Roles within the service help to support their rehabilitation and protect the public.

2022 data on the diversity of the Probation Service shows a 1% increase to 17% in the number of Probation Service staff from an ethnically diverse background compared to 16% in 2020. HMPPS is continuing to build on this work to attract a wave of recruits who are even more representative of the community they serve.

All roles are challenging and rewarding, with great training, support and opportunities for progression. Specific roles currently include:

Case administrators play a key role, using their great organisational and communication skills to support their probation colleagues and help offenders turn their lives around. Eligibility requirements for the role include strong communication skills (verbal and written) and good IT and keyboard skills.

Probation services officers undertake the full range of work with offenders before and after sentence, and in the community – including, assessments, sentencing and managing people throughout their probation period. Eligibility requirements for the role include a minimum C-grade GCSEs or equivalent, or relevant work experience including sufficient writing skills

Applications to become a case administrator or probation services officer are open now:  https://probationjobs.co.uk/

Through the trainee probation officer programme, candidates will gain a level 6 equivalent professional qualification upon completion, along with a competitive salary and generous leave. When you start your training, you’ll be a probation services officer, learning whilst earning on the job and studying to gain your fully funded Professional Qualification in Probation (PQiP). Eligibility requirements for the role include a Level 5 qualification, or above, such as an honours degree, a foundation degree or a diploma of higher education. Register your interest now: https://www.traintobeaprobationofficer.com/apply/

Young Surrey residents will get the chance to walk out with the finalists of this year’s Surrey Senior Cup final – thanks to Specsavers.

In partnership with Specsavers, who sponsor the competition, Surrey Football Association will offer the opportunity for children to be a part of this year’s team of Surrey mascots. The lucky winners will walk out with both teams competing in the final of the Specsavers Surrey Senior Cup.

In addition, they will also receive a brand-new kit to wear on the day of the final and a free set of tickets for their adult or guardian to attend the game.

The final is scheduled to take place on Wednesday 3 May 2023 at Meadowbank Football Ground, home of Surrey FA and Dorking Wanderers Football Club.

Closing on Sunday 23April, the online competition invites adult guardians to enter on behalf of a child aged four to twelve years. To be in with the chance of winning, the child needs to answer this very simple question:

“What is your most memorable moment either playing or supporting football?”

Specsavers stores across Surrey have been lead sponsors of the Senior Surrey Cup for over five years. Its network of local opticians and audiologists across the county share a common mission with Surrey FA, to better the health of those within their local communities.

Epsom and Leatherhead Retail Director Mihaela Ovadiuc comments: ‘Grassroots sports plays such an important role to instil healthy, active living across all age groups. It’s why all the Specsavers stores across the Surrey region have come together to invest in the Surrey FA. We want to ensure they can keep going for many years to come and keep that passion for football alive and kicking across the county.’

Parents and guardians representing their child can apply to enter the competition here:

http://bit.ly/3nKR2LO

Representatives of Surrey FA will directly contact winners. Terms and conditions apply.